Filed: Mar. 17, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-2159 KAMRAN TAVAKOLI-NOURI, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Andre M. Davis, District Judge. (CA-98- 216-AMD) Submitted: March 11, 1999 Decided: March 17, 1999 Before WIDENER and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kamran
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-2159 KAMRAN TAVAKOLI-NOURI, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Andre M. Davis, District Judge. (CA-98- 216-AMD) Submitted: March 11, 1999 Decided: March 17, 1999 Before WIDENER and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kamran T..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-2159
KAMRAN TAVAKOLI-NOURI,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Andre M. Davis, District Judge. (CA-98-
216-AMD)
Submitted: March 11, 1999 Decided: March 17, 1999
Before WIDENER and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Kamran Tavakoli-Nouri, Appellant Pro Se. Larry David Adams, Assis-
tant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Kamran Tavakoli-Nouri appeals the district court’s order dis-
missing his action filed under the Freedom of Information Act. We
have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find
no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of
the district court. See Tavakoli-Nouri v. CIA, No. CA-98-216-AMD
(D. Md. July 15, 1998).* We dispense with oral argument because
the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the ma-
terials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED
*
The order from which Tavakoli-Nouri appeals was filed on
7-13-98, and entered on the district court's docket on 7-15-98,
in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 58 and 79(a). See Wilson v.
Murray,
806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986).
2