Filed: Jun. 03, 2003
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-2418 JAMES E. KEEGAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus KAISER PERMANENTE, a/k/a Kaiser Foundation Health Plan of the Mid-Atlantic States, Incorporated, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, District Judge. (CA-02-1426-A) Submitted: May 29, 2003 Decided: June 3, 2003 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirme
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-2418 JAMES E. KEEGAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus KAISER PERMANENTE, a/k/a Kaiser Foundation Health Plan of the Mid-Atlantic States, Incorporated, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, District Judge. (CA-02-1426-A) Submitted: May 29, 2003 Decided: June 3, 2003 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-2418 JAMES E. KEEGAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus KAISER PERMANENTE, a/k/a Kaiser Foundation Health Plan of the Mid-Atlantic States, Incorporated, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, District Judge. (CA-02-1426-A) Submitted: May 29, 2003 Decided: June 3, 2003 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James E. Keegan, Appellant Pro Se. Brian Edward Messaris, TYDINGS & ROSENBERG, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: James E. Keegan appeals the district court’s order dismissing his civil complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Keegan v. Kaiser Permanente, No. CA-02-1426-A (E.D. Va. filed Nov. 15, 2002, and entered Nov. 20, 2002). 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 2
