Filed: Sep. 01, 2009
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-1451 RALPH JAFFE, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. BALTIMORE COUNTY LIBRARY BOARD, Defendant – Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (1:08-cv-01437-RDB) Submitted: August 26, 2009 Decided: September 1, 2009 Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and GREGORY and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ralph Jaffe, Appel
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-1451 RALPH JAFFE, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. BALTIMORE COUNTY LIBRARY BOARD, Defendant – Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (1:08-cv-01437-RDB) Submitted: August 26, 2009 Decided: September 1, 2009 Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and GREGORY and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ralph Jaffe, Appell..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-1451 RALPH JAFFE, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. BALTIMORE COUNTY LIBRARY BOARD, Defendant – Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (1:08-cv-01437-RDB) Submitted: August 26, 2009 Decided: September 1, 2009 Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and GREGORY and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ralph Jaffe, Appellant Pro Se. James Joseph Nolan, Jr., BALTIMORE COUNTY OFFICE OF LAW, Towson, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Ralph Jaffe appeals the district court’s order granting the Defendant’s motion to dismiss his civil action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Jaffe v. Baltimore County Library Bd., No. 1:08-cv- 01437-RDB (D. Md. March 25, 2009). 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
