Filed: Aug. 27, 2020
Latest Update: Sep. 22, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 20-1116 RICHARD C. WEIDMAN, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION, Defendant – Appellee, and F. BUD CARR; KENT DIXON; MEGHAN HASSON; CLARION ELLIS JOHNSON; STEPHEN D. JONES; GERARD MONSIVAIZ; JEREMY SAMPSELL; VICTORIA MARTIN WELDON; DANIEL WHITFIELD; JEFFREY WOODBURY, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 20-1116 RICHARD C. WEIDMAN, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION, Defendant – Appellee, and F. BUD CARR; KENT DIXON; MEGHAN HASSON; CLARION ELLIS JOHNSON; STEPHEN D. JONES; GERARD MONSIVAIZ; JEREMY SAMPSELL; VICTORIA MARTIN WELDON; DANIEL WHITFIELD; JEFFREY WOODBURY, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge...
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 20-1116 RICHARD C. WEIDMAN, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION, Defendant – Appellee, and F. BUD CARR; KENT DIXON; MEGHAN HASSON; CLARION ELLIS JOHNSON; STEPHEN D. JONES; GERARD MONSIVAIZ; JEREMY SAMPSELL; VICTORIA MARTIN WELDON; DANIEL WHITFIELD; JEFFREY WOODBURY, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:13-cv-00501-CMH-JFA) Submitted: August 25, 2020 Decided: August 27, 2020 Before KING and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Richard C. Weidman, Appellant Pro Se. Ryan Michael Bates, HUNTON ANDREWS KURTH, LLP, McLean, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Richard C. Weidman appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to deny Exxon Mobil’s Bill of Costs. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Weidman v. Exxon Mobil Corp., No. 1:13-cv-00501-CMH-JFA (E.D. Va. Jan. 28, 2020). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 3