Wyne v. Medo Industries Inc

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-2104

ROBERT M. WYNE; NICOLAS W. LEWIS,

Plaintiffs - Appellants,

versus

MEDO INDUSTRIES, INCORPORATED,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (CA- 02-1812-RDB)

Submitted: January 27, 2005 Decided: February 1, 2005

Before LUTTIG and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Robert M. Wyne, Nicolas W. Lewis, Appellants Pro Se. Sharon A. Israel, JENKENS & GILCHRIST, P.C., Houston, Texas, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:

Robert M. Wyne and Nicolas W. Lewis appeal the district

court’s orders granting summary judgment in favor of Medo

Industries, Inc., and denying their motion filed pursuant to Fed.

R. Civ. P. 59(e). We have reviewed the record and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s

grant of summary judgment on the reasoning of the district court,

see Wyne v. Medo Indus., Inc., No. CA-02-1812-RDB (D. Md. Mar. 25,

2004), and find no abuse of the district court’s discretion in its

denial of the motion for reconsideration. Collison v.

International Chem. Workers Union, 34 F.3d 233, 236 (4th Cir.

1994). We grant Appellants’ motion to place Appellants’ materials

under seal. We deny Appellants’ motion for 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

- 2 -