Filed: Oct. 06, 2014
Latest Update: Oct. 06, 2014
Summary: UBNPUBLISHED Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM. Malik Bey appeals the district court's orders dismissing his complaint alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. 1692-1692y (2012), the Maryland Consumer Debt Collections Act, Md. Code Ann., Com. Law, 14-201 to -204, and the Maryland Consumer Protection Act, Md. Code Ann., Com. Law, 13-101 to -501, and denying reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find
Summary: UBNPUBLISHED Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM. Malik Bey appeals the district court's orders dismissing his complaint alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. 1692-1692y (2012), the Maryland Consumer Debt Collections Act, Md. Code Ann., Com. Law, 14-201 to -204, and the Maryland Consumer Protection Act, Md. Code Ann., Com. Law, 13-101 to -501, and denying reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find n..
More
UBNPUBLISHED
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM.
Malik Bey appeals the district court's orders dismissing his complaint alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692-1692y (2012), the Maryland Consumer Debt Collections Act, Md. Code Ann., Com. Law, §§ 14-201 to -204, and the Maryland Consumer Protection Act, Md. Code Ann., Com. Law, §§ 13-101 to -501, and denying reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Bey v. Shapiro Brown & Alt, LLP, No. 8:13-cv-01562-PWG (D. Md. Feb. 20 & Mar. 21, 2014). 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.
