Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Mahbobeh Shariati v. US Department of Justice, 19-1753 (2019)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 19-1753 Visitors: 3
Filed: Nov. 21, 2019
Latest Update: Nov. 21, 2019
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-1753 MAHBOBEH SHARIATI, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Civil Torts Division; UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA; UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA; H. JASON GOLD, Trustee; DYLAN G. TRACHE, PA, Trustee, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S.
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-1753 MAHBOBEH SHARIATI, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Civil Torts Division; UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA; UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA; H. JASON GOLD, Trustee; DYLAN G. TRACHE, PA, Trustee, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, Senior District Judge. (1:18-cv-01067-TSE-TCB) Submitted: November 19, 2019 Decided: November 21, 2019 Before WILKINSON and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Mahbobeh Shariati, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Mahbobeh Shariati appeals the district court’s order denying her motion to vacate a proof of claim filed by a creditor who is not a party to the proceeding below. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal for the reasons stated by the district court. See Shariati v. United States Dep’t of Justice, No. 1:18-cv-01067-TSE-TCB (E.D. Va., June 11, 2019). 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. DISMISSED 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