United States v. Fletcher

Fourth Circuit

United States v. Fletcher

333 F. App'x 719

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Fletcher. Read the opinion of the Court — 205 F. App'x 155 →

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided October 8, 2009·No. No. 09-1655·Published

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Wayne Allen Fletcher appeals a district court order denying his motion filed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s order and find the court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion. See Werner v. Carbo, 731 F.2d 204, 206 (4th Cir.1984) (stating standard of review). Accordingly, we affirm. 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:

Wayne Allen Fletcher appeals a district court order denying his motion filed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s order and find the court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion. See Werner v. Carbo, 731 F.2d 204, 206 (4th Cir.1984) (stating standard of review). Accordingly, we affirm. 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.

United States v. Fletcher, 333 F. App'x 719 (4th Cir. 2009).

Pincite

333 F. App'x 719 (United States v. Fletcher) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related