Billy Asemani v. US
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
BILLY G. ASEMANI, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Andre M. Davis, District Judge. (1:05-cv02821-AMD)
June 26, 2008
June 30, 2008
Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge.
Remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Billy G. Asemani, Appellant Pro Se. Ariana Wright Arnold, Melanie Lisa Glickson, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Billy Asemani seeks to appeal the district court's order granting the Government's motion for summary judgment in this Federal Tort Claims Act action. After the district court granted
the Government's motion for summary judgment, Asemani filed a timely notice of appeal. He then directed correspondence to the
district court contending that the court entered its order three days before Asemani's response to the Government was due pursuant to the court's notice under Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975). The district court construed Asemani's correspondence
as a motion pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(1) and issued an order indicating its inclination to grant Asemani's post-judgment motion. See Fobian v. Storage Tech. Corp., 164 F.3d 887, 891 (4th Accordingly, we remand for the limited purpose of
permitting the district court to consider the merits of Asemani's response to the Government's motion for summary judgment. at 892. See id.
In so doing, we express no opinion on the merits of
Asemani's claims. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
- 2 -
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?