Filed: Apr. 27, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-7667 ALEXANDER OTIS MATTHEWS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. RYAN FAULCONER, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Liam O’Grady, District Judge. (1:15-cv-00448-LO-MSN) Submitted: April 25, 2017 Decided: April 27, 2017 Before MOTZ, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Alexander Otis Matthews, Appellant Pro Se
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-7667 ALEXANDER OTIS MATTHEWS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. RYAN FAULCONER, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Liam O’Grady, District Judge. (1:15-cv-00448-LO-MSN) Submitted: April 25, 2017 Decided: April 27, 2017 Before MOTZ, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Alexander Otis Matthews, Appellant Pro Se...
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-7667 ALEXANDER OTIS MATTHEWS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. RYAN FAULCONER, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Liam O’Grady, District Judge. (1:15-cv-00448-LO-MSN) Submitted: April 25, 2017 Decided: April 27, 2017 Before MOTZ, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Alexander Otis Matthews, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Alexander Otis Mathews appeals the district court’s order denying his Rule 59(e) motion for reconsideration of its order reclassifying Matthews’ complaint as an attorney misconduct disciplinary complaint and denying his misconduct claims. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Matthews v. Faulconer, No. 1:15-cv-00448-LO-MSN (E.D. Va., filed Nov. 14 & entered Nov. 15, 2016). 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
