Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Alex Rahmi v. United States Trustee, 18-1313 (2018)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 18-1313 Visitors: 1
Filed: Aug. 27, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-1313 In re: ALEX RAHMI, Debtor. - UNITED STATES TRUSTEE, Trustee-Appellee, and MARTIN PATRICK SHEEHAN, Trustee, v. ALEX RAHMI, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. Gina M. Groh, Chief District Judge. (3:17-cv-00105-GMG) Submitted: August 23, 2018 Decided: August 27, 2018 Before DUNCAN and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Ci
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-1313 In re: ALEX RAHMI, Debtor. ------------------------------------- UNITED STATES TRUSTEE, Trustee-Appellee, and MARTIN PATRICK SHEEHAN, Trustee, v. ALEX RAHMI, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. Gina M. Groh, Chief District Judge. (3:17-cv-00105-GMG) Submitted: August 23, 2018 Decided: August 27, 2018 Before DUNCAN and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Alex Rahmi, Appellant Pro Se. Hugh Michael Bernstein, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRUSTEE, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Alex Rahmi appeals the district court’s order affirming the bankruptcy court’s order denying his motion to vacate a prior order denying a discharge in Rahmi’s underlying bankruptcy proceeding. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Rahmi v. United States Trustee, No. 3:17-cv-00105-GMG (N.D.W. Va. Feb. 22, 2018). We grant Rahmi’s motion to seal his informal brief and 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 3
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