Filed: Mar. 29, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7894 WAYNE E. JACKSON-EL, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William D. Quarles, Jr., District Judge. (1:06-cv-02215-WDQ) Submitted: March 22, 2007 Decided: March 29, 2007 Before WIDENER and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam op
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7894 WAYNE E. JACKSON-EL, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William D. Quarles, Jr., District Judge. (1:06-cv-02215-WDQ) Submitted: March 22, 2007 Decided: March 29, 2007 Before WIDENER and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opi..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7894 WAYNE E. JACKSON-EL, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William D. Quarles, Jr., District Judge. (1:06-cv-02215-WDQ) Submitted: March 22, 2007 Decided: March 29, 2007 Before WIDENER and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Wayne E. Jackson-El, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Wayne E. Jackson-El appeals the district court’s order summarily dismissing his complaint. We agree with the district court that Jackson-El’s complaint is indecipherable and fails to state a claim. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal as frivolous. 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 -
