Filed: Oct. 06, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-1943 ROBERT JAMES KENNY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior Dis- trict Judge. (CA-99-296-3) Submitted: September 30, 1999 Decided: October 6, 1999 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished pe
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-1943 ROBERT JAMES KENNY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior Dis- trict Judge. (CA-99-296-3) Submitted: September 30, 1999 Decided: October 6, 1999 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-1943 ROBERT JAMES KENNY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior Dis- trict Judge. (CA-99-296-3) Submitted: September 30, 1999 Decided: October 6, 1999 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert James Kenny, Appellant Pro Se. Mary Hannah Lauck, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Robert James Kenny appeals from the district court’s order dismissing his civil action and imposing a pre-filing injunction. 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 Kenny v. United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, No. CA-99-296-3 (E.D. Va. June 16, 1999). We deny Kenny’s motion to expedite and 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