Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Harrison Lewis, III v. Donald Trump, 18-2460 (2019)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 18-2460
Filed: May 20, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-2460 HARRISON LEWIS, III, Petitioner - Appellant, v. PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP; JOHN KELLY, W.H. Chief of Staff; U.S.S.S. FORWARDER, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (1:18-cv-02985-RDB) Submitted: May 2, 2019 Decided: May 20, 2019 Before NIEMEYER and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge. Aff
More
                                    UNPUBLISHED

                       UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                                         No. 18-2460


HARRISON LEWIS, III,

                    Petitioner - Appellant,

             v.

PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP; JOHN KELLY, W.H. Chief of Staff; U.S.S.S.
FORWARDER,

                    Respondents - Appellees.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.
Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (1:18-cv-02985-RDB)


Submitted: May 2, 2019                                            Decided: May 20, 2019


Before NIEMEYER and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.


Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Harrison Lewis, III, Appellant Pro Se.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

      Harrison Lewis, III, appeals the district court’s order dismissing his civil

complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012). We have reviewed the record

and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny the pending motions and affirm for

the reasons stated by the district court. See Lewis v. Trump, No. 1:18-cv-02985-RDB (D.

Md. Nov. 1, 2018).      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

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer