Filed: Apr. 02, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-2224 FELIX NIETO, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. ALLIED INTERSTATE, LLC, Defendant – Appellee, and ALLIED INTERSTATE, INC., a corporation, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, Chief District Judge. (1:13-cv-03495-CCB) Submitted: March 26, 2015 Decided: April 2, 2015 Before KING, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-2224 FELIX NIETO, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. ALLIED INTERSTATE, LLC, Defendant – Appellee, and ALLIED INTERSTATE, INC., a corporation, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, Chief District Judge. (1:13-cv-03495-CCB) Submitted: March 26, 2015 Decided: April 2, 2015 Before KING, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam o..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-2224
FELIX NIETO,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
ALLIED INTERSTATE, LLC,
Defendant – Appellee,
and
ALLIED INTERSTATE, INC., a corporation,
Defendant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, Chief District
Judge. (1:13-cv-03495-CCB)
Submitted: March 26, 2015 Decided: April 2, 2015
Before KING, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Felix Nieto, Appellant Pro Se. Stephen Todd Fowler, REED SMITH,
LLP, Falls Church, Virginia, Michael B. Roberts, REED SMITH LLP,
Washington, D.C., for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Felix Nieto appeals the district court’s order granting
Defendant summary judgment in Nieto’s civil action, which was
brought pursuant to the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. See
47 U.S.C. § 227 (2012). We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated
by the district court. See Nieto v. Allied Interstate, LLC, No.
1:13-cv-03495-CCB (D. Md. Oct. 3, 2014). 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