Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Fleming v. Potter, 05-1802 (2005)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 05-1802 Visitors: 60
Filed: Dec. 21, 2005
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-1802 MARION FLEMING, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JOHN E. POTTER, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (CA-04-444-2) Submitted: November 30, 2005 Decided: December 21, 2005 Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curia
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-1802 MARION FLEMING, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JOHN E. POTTER, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (CA-04-444-2) Submitted: November 30, 2005 Decided: December 21, 2005 Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Marion Fleming, Appellant Pro Se. Virginia Lynn Van Valkenburg, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Marion Fleming appeals the district court’s order dismissing his civil action under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 621 to 634 (2000) (“ADEA”) and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. §§ 701 to 797 (2000) (the “Rehabilitation Act”). We deny Fleming leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal for the reasons stated by the district court in its memorandum opinion. See Fleming v. Potter, No. CA-04-444-2 (E.D. Va. filed May 18, 2005; entered May 19, 2005). 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. DISMISSED - 2 -
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer