Filed: Feb. 21, 2006
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-2230 DANIEL E. HEILY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (CA-05-104-1) Submitted: February 16, 2006 Decided: February 21, 2006 Before MICHAEL and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-2230 DANIEL E. HEILY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (CA-05-104-1) Submitted: February 16, 2006 Decided: February 21, 2006 Before MICHAEL and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-2230 DANIEL E. HEILY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (CA-05-104-1) Submitted: February 16, 2006 Decided: February 21, 2006 Before MICHAEL and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Daniel E. Heily, Appellant Pro Se. R. Joseph Sher, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Daniel E. Heily appeals the district court’s order dismissing his Freedom of Information Act case. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Heily v. United States Dep’t of Interior, No. CA-05-104-1 (E.D. Va. Oct. 13, 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. AFFIRMED - 2 -
