Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Rivera v. Gonzales, 06-6895 (2006)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 06-6895 Visitors: 8
Filed: Aug. 24, 2006
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-6895 VINCENT F. RIVERA, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus ALBERTO GONZALES, United States Attorney General, Judicial Conference of the USA, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, District Judge. (1:05-cv-00246-TSE) Submitted: July 31, 2006 Decided: August 24, 2006 Before WILKINSON, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by un
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-6895 VINCENT F. RIVERA, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus ALBERTO GONZALES, United States Attorney General, Judicial Conference of the USA, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, District Judge. (1:05-cv-00246-TSE) Submitted: July 31, 2006 Decided: August 24, 2006 Before WILKINSON, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Vincent F. Rivera, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Vincent F. Rivera appeals the district court’s order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion in which he sought relief from the judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Rivera v. Gonzales, No. 1:05-cv-00246-TSE (E.D. Va. filed Apr. 24, 2006; entered Apr. 25, 2006). We deny Rivera’s motion for appointment of counsel and his motion to supplement the record. Further, we deny as moot Rivera’s motion to expedite the appeal. 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