Salami v. North Carolina Agriculture & Technical State University

Fourth Circuit

Salami v. North Carolina Agriculture & Technical State University

417 F. App'x 353

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedMarch 17, 2011

DocketNo. 10-1281

StatusPublished

This text of 417 F. App'x 353 (Salami v. North Carolina Agriculture & Technical State University) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Salami v. North Carolina Agriculture & Technical State University, 417 F. App'x 353 (4th Cir. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Mohammad Reza Salami appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and granting the North Carolina Agriculture & Technical State University’s motion for [354]*354summary judgment. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Salami v. Monroe, No. 1:07-cv-00621-JAB, 2010 WL 817483 (M.D.N.C. Mar. 4, 2010). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Mohammad Reza Salami appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and granting the North Carolina Agriculture & Technical State University’s motion for [354]*354summary judgment. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Salami v. Monroe, No. 1:07-cv-00621-JAB, 2010 WL 817483 (M.D.N.C. Mar. 4, 2010). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

417 F. App'x 353, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/salami-v-north-carolina-agriculture-technical-state-university-ca4-2011.