Filed: Apr. 12, 2012
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-1440 MARC B. GOODMAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. PRAXAIR, INCORPORATED; PRAXAIR SERVICES, INCORPORATED, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Marvin J. Garbis, Senior District Judge. (1:04-cv-00391-MJG) Submitted: March 29, 2012 Decided: April 12, 2012 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-1440 MARC B. GOODMAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. PRAXAIR, INCORPORATED; PRAXAIR SERVICES, INCORPORATED, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Marvin J. Garbis, Senior District Judge. (1:04-cv-00391-MJG) Submitted: March 29, 2012 Decided: April 12, 2012 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. ..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-1440
MARC B. GOODMAN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
PRAXAIR, INCORPORATED; PRAXAIR SERVICES, INCORPORATED,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Marvin J. Garbis, Senior District
Judge. (1:04-cv-00391-MJG)
Submitted: March 29, 2012 Decided: April 12, 2012
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Marc B. Goodman, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Bess, VEDDER PRICE, PC,
Washington, D.C., for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Marc B. Goodman appeals the district court’s order
granting partial summary judgment for Defendants, the jury’s
verdict in favor of Defendants, and the district court’s order
denying his post-judgment motion for judgment as a matter of law
in his breach of contract suit. We have thoroughly reviewed the
record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for
the reasons stated by the district court. Goodman v. Praxair,
Inc., No. 1:04-cv-00391-MJG (D. Md. Apr. 2, 2008; Mar. 18, 2009;
Nov. 24, 2009; Mar. 30, 2011). We find no basis to recuse the
district judge and accordingly deny Goodman’s motion that seeks
such relief. 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