Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Clarke, 04-1210 (2005)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 04-1210 Visitors: 46
Filed: Jan. 21, 2005
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1210 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; OFFICE OF FEDERAL HOUSING, Enterprise Oversight, Petitioners - Appellees, versus VAUGHN CLARKE, Respondent - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CA- 03-3440-DKC) Submitted: December 3, 2004 Decided: January 21, 2005 Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished p
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1210 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; OFFICE OF FEDERAL HOUSING, Enterprise Oversight, Petitioners - Appellees, versus VAUGHN CLARKE, Respondent - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CA- 03-3440-DKC) Submitted: December 3, 2004 Decided: January 21, 2005 Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Steven M. Salky, ZUCKERMAN SPAEDER L.L.P., Washington, D.C., for Appellant. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, Mark Stern, Jeffrey A. Wadsworth, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Vaughn Clarke appeals the district court’s order granting the Government’s petition for summary enforcement of an administrative subpoena and ordering Clarke to comply with the subpoena. We have reviewed the parties’ submissions on appeal and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See United States v. Clarke, No. CA- 03-3440-DKC (D. Md. Feb. 6, 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 -
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