Filed: Jun. 08, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 26, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-1207 ASLAM HANDY, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. BEN BERNANKE, trading as Federal Reserve Bank, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Henry E. Hudson, District Judge. (3:11-cv-00672-HEH) Submitted: May 31, 2012 Decided: June 8, 2012 Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Aslam Handy, Appella
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-1207 ASLAM HANDY, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. BEN BERNANKE, trading as Federal Reserve Bank, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Henry E. Hudson, District Judge. (3:11-cv-00672-HEH) Submitted: May 31, 2012 Decided: June 8, 2012 Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Aslam Handy, Appellan..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-1207 ASLAM HANDY, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. BEN BERNANKE, trading as Federal Reserve Bank, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Henry E. Hudson, District Judge. (3:11-cv-00672-HEH) Submitted: May 31, 2012 Decided: June 8, 2012 Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Aslam Handy, Appellant Pro Se. Yvonne Facchina Mizusawa, BOARD OF GOVERNORS, Washington, DC; Debra J. Prillaman, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Aslam Handy appeals the district court’s order dismissing his civil suit. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Handy v. Bernanke, No. 3:11-cv- 00672-HEH (E.D. Va., Jan. 26, 2012). 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
