Filed: Mar. 05, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-1000 KENRICK HAMILTON, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION - GENERAL COUNSEL Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (1:13-cv-01311-JCC-TRJ) Submitted: February 27, 2014 Decided: March 5, 2014 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-1000 KENRICK HAMILTON, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION - GENERAL COUNSEL Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (1:13-cv-01311-JCC-TRJ) Submitted: February 27, 2014 Decided: March 5, 2014 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-1000 KENRICK HAMILTON, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION - GENERAL COUNSEL Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (1:13-cv-01311-JCC-TRJ) Submitted: February 27, 2014 Decided: March 5, 2014 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kenrick Hamilton, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Kenrick Hamilton appeals the district court’s order dismissing his complaint without prejudice. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Hamilton v. Transp. Sec. Admin., No. 1:13-cv-01311-JCC-TRJ (E.D. Va. Nov. 22, 2013). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2
