Filed: Apr. 26, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-7949 ROBERT L. SISK, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Frank D. Whitney, Chief District Judge. (1:15-cv-00154-FDW) Submitted: April 21, 2016 Decided: April 26, 2016 Before WILKINSON, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert Lionel Sisk, App
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-7949 ROBERT L. SISK, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Frank D. Whitney, Chief District Judge. (1:15-cv-00154-FDW) Submitted: April 21, 2016 Decided: April 26, 2016 Before WILKINSON, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert Lionel Sisk, Appe..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-7949
ROBERT L. SISK,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Frank D. Whitney,
Chief District Judge. (1:15-cv-00154-FDW)
Submitted: April 21, 2016 Decided: April 26, 2016
Before WILKINSON, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Robert Lionel Sisk, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Robert L. Sisk appeals the district court’s orders
dismissing Sisk’s civil complaint, which was filed against the
United States pursuant to the Declaratory Judgment Act, 28
U.S.C. § 2201 (2012), and denying Sisk’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e)
motion to alter or amend judgment. We have reviewed the record
and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the
district court’s orders. See Sisk v. United States, No. 1:15-
cv-00154-FDW (W.D.N.C. Oct. 20, 2015 & Nov. 20, 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