Filed: Jun. 10, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1127 KEMIL A. MESAYS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus COLIN POWELL, Secretary of the Department of State, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (CA- 03-3256-RDB) Submitted: May 14, 2004 Decided: June 10, 2004 Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kemil A. Mesays,
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1127 KEMIL A. MESAYS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus COLIN POWELL, Secretary of the Department of State, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (CA- 03-3256-RDB) Submitted: May 14, 2004 Decided: June 10, 2004 Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kemil A. Mesays, ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1127 KEMIL A. MESAYS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus COLIN POWELL, Secretary of the Department of State, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (CA- 03-3256-RDB) Submitted: May 14, 2004 Decided: June 10, 2004 Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kemil A. Mesays, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Kemil A. Mesays appeals the district court’s orders dismissing his employment discrimination complaint as untimely filed, denying his motion for reconsideration, and denying his request for a refund of the filing fee. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Mesays v. Powell, No. CA-03- 3256-RDB (D. Md. Nov. 24, 2003; Dec. 16, 2003; filed Jan. 9, 2004, entered Jan. 22, 2004). 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 -
