Filed: May 19, 2005
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-2481 EDWARD O. OGALO, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CAMPBELL UNIVERSITY, INCORPORATED, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (CA-04-561-5-BO) Submitted: April 27, 2005 Decided: May 19, 2005 Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Edward O. Ogalo, Appe
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-2481 EDWARD O. OGALO, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CAMPBELL UNIVERSITY, INCORPORATED, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (CA-04-561-5-BO) Submitted: April 27, 2005 Decided: May 19, 2005 Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Edward O. Ogalo, Appel..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-2481 EDWARD O. OGALO, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CAMPBELL UNIVERSITY, INCORPORATED, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (CA-04-561-5-BO) Submitted: April 27, 2005 Decided: May 19, 2005 Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Edward O. Ogalo, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Edward O. Ogalo appeals the district court’s order dismissing his civil action for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Ogalo v. Campbell University, No. CA-04-561-5- BO (E.D.N.C. Nov. 3, 2004). We deny Ogalo’s motions to transfer his action, to consolidate it with pending state matters, and to join the United States Department of Justice and United States Department of Homeland Security as defendants. We also deny his motion for a change of venue. We also deny Ogalo’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 -