Filed: Jul. 29, 2013
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-1449 ANDRE J. HOWARD, and family, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. FARMERS MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Abingdon. James P. Jones, District Judge. (1:13-mc-00032-JPJ) Submitted: July 25, 2013 Decided: July 29, 2013 Before GREGORY, DAVIS, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Andre J. Howar
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-1449 ANDRE J. HOWARD, and family, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. FARMERS MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Abingdon. James P. Jones, District Judge. (1:13-mc-00032-JPJ) Submitted: July 25, 2013 Decided: July 29, 2013 Before GREGORY, DAVIS, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Andre J. Howard..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-1449 ANDRE J. HOWARD, and family, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. FARMERS MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Abingdon. James P. Jones, District Judge. (1:13-mc-00032-JPJ) Submitted: July 25, 2013 Decided: July 29, 2013 Before GREGORY, DAVIS, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Andre J. Howard, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Andre J. Howard, appeals the district court’s order striking Howard’s complaint from the docket. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Howard v. Farmers Mut. Fire Ins. Co., No. 1:13-mc-00032-JPJ (W.D. Va. Mar. 26, 2013). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2
