Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Douglas Batchelor, 15-1861 (2015)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 15-1861 Visitors: 38
Filed: Dec. 17, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-1861 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. DOUGLAS F. BATCHELOR, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. John A. Gibney, Jr., District Judge. (3:14-cv-00583-JAG) Submitted: December 15, 2015 Decided: December 17, 2015 Before GREGORY and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-1861 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. DOUGLAS F. BATCHELOR, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. John A. Gibney, Jr., District Judge. (3:14-cv-00583-JAG) Submitted: December 15, 2015 Decided: December 17, 2015 Before GREGORY and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Douglas F. Batchelor, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Joel Branman, Jonathan S. Cohen, Michael Martineau, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Tax Division, Washington, D.C.; Robert P. McIntosh, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Douglas F. Batchelor appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to the United States on its action seeking to reduce to judgment Batchelor’s unpaid federal income tax liabilities for 2000–2003. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Batchelor, No. 3:14-cv-00583-JAG (E.D. Va. June 5, 2015). 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
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