Filed: Jul. 23, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 26, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-1681 GUY F. MARTIN, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. PRESIDENT BARACK H. OBAMA, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (1:11-cv-03444-RDB) Submitted: July 19, 2012 Decided: July 23, 2012 Before DUNCAN, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Guy F. Martin, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Jason
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-1681 GUY F. MARTIN, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. PRESIDENT BARACK H. OBAMA, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (1:11-cv-03444-RDB) Submitted: July 19, 2012 Decided: July 23, 2012 Before DUNCAN, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Guy F. Martin, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Jason ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-1681 GUY F. MARTIN, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. PRESIDENT BARACK H. OBAMA, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (1:11-cv-03444-RDB) Submitted: July 19, 2012 Decided: July 23, 2012 Before DUNCAN, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Guy F. Martin, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Jason Daniel Medinger, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Guy Martin, Jr., appeals the district court’s order granting the Defendant’s motion to dismiss his Complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under the political question doctrine. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Martin v. Obama, No. 1:11-cv-03444-RDB (D. Md. Apr. 18, 2012). 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. AFFIRMED 2
