Filed: Jun. 18, 2002
Latest Update: Feb. 12, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-1311 FRANCIS AKINRO, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PATRICIA MAHER, Deputy Assistant Attorney General; GEORGE BUSH, President of the United States of America, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CA- 02-555-CCB) Submitted: June 13, 2002 Decided: June 18, 2002 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. A
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-1311 FRANCIS AKINRO, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PATRICIA MAHER, Deputy Assistant Attorney General; GEORGE BUSH, President of the United States of America, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CA- 02-555-CCB) Submitted: June 13, 2002 Decided: June 18, 2002 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Af..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-1311
FRANCIS AKINRO,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
PATRICIA MAHER, Deputy Assistant Attorney
General; GEORGE BUSH, President of the United
States of America,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CA-
02-555-CCB)
Submitted: June 13, 2002 Decided: June 18, 2002
Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Francis Akinro, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Francis Akinro, a Maryland inmate, appeals the district
court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp.
2001) complaint under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915A (West Supp. 2000). We
have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find
that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we affirm based on the
reasoning of the district court. See Akinro v. Maher, No. CA-02-
555-CCB (D. Md. Mar. 4, 2002). We deny Akinro’s motion for default
judgment. We also deny Akinro’s 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