Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Lotfian, 02-1019 (2002)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 02-1019 Visitors: 41
Filed: May 22, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-1019 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus FRED A. LOTFIAN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, District Judge. (CA- 00-1835-PJM) Submitted: May 16, 2002 Decided: May 22, 2002 Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Fred A. Lotfian, Appellant Pro Se. Lynne An
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-1019 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus FRED A. LOTFIAN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, District Judge. (CA- 00-1835-PJM) Submitted: May 16, 2002 Decided: May 22, 2002 Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Fred A. Lotfian, Appellant Pro Se. Lynne Ann Battaglia, Tamera Lynn Fine, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Fred A. Lotfian appeals from the district court’s order entering judgment in favor of the United States in its action to recover amounts due on a promissory note executed in connection with a student loan. 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. United States v. Lotfian, No. CA-00-1835-PJM (D. Md. filed Dec. 7, 2001 & entered Dec. 10, 2001). We deny as moot the Government’s motion to require Lotfian to serve his informal brief. 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
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