Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Woods, 10-2340 (2011)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 10-2340 Visitors: 91
Filed: Apr. 22, 2011
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-2340 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ISAAC LEE WOODS; REGINA BAILEY WOODS; ELLA R. WOODS, Defendants – Appellants, and UNLIMITED FINANCIAL RESOURCES, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at New Bern. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (5:07-cv-00187-BR) Submitted: April 4, 2011 Decided: April 22, 2011 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD,
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-2340 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ISAAC LEE WOODS; REGINA BAILEY WOODS; ELLA R. WOODS, Defendants – Appellants, and UNLIMITED FINANCIAL RESOURCES, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at New Bern. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (5:07-cv-00187-BR) Submitted: April 4, 2011 Decided: April 22, 2011 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Isaac Lee Woods, Regina Bailey Woods, Ella R. Woods, Appellants Pro Se. S. Katherine Burnette, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Isaac Lee Woods, Regina Bailey Woods and Ella R. Woods appeal the district court’s order denying their motion filed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(4). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s order and affirm for the reasons cited by the district court. See United States v. Woods, No. 5:07-cv- 00187-BR (E.D.N.C. Sept. 27, 2010). We deny the Woods’ motion for summary disposition. We also deny the motion for 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