David Whitehead v. Strayer University

Filing 920090902

Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-2060 DAVID LOUIS WHITEHEAD, Plaintiff Appellant, v. STRAYER UNIVERSITY; SOUTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY; HYATT INC.; UNNAMED AKA INC. AND JANE DOE AND 1-25 DOES, Defendants Appellees. HOTEL No. 09-1154 DAVID LOUIS WHITEHEAD, Plaintiff Appellant, v. STRAYER UNIVERSITY; SOUTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY; HYATT INC.; UNNAMED AKA INC. AND JANE DOE AND 1-25 DOES, Defendants Appellees. HOTEL Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:08-cv-00832-LMB-TCB) Submitted: August 26, 2009 Decided: September 2, 2009 Before MICHAEL, KING, and GREGORY Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. David Louis Whitehead, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: David Whitehead appeals the district court's August We 29, 2008, September 8, 2008 and September 11, 2008 orders. have reviewed we the deny record and find no reversible for error. of Accordingly, Whitehead's motion appointment counsel; deny Whitehead's en banc request/motion to seize all products based on Whitehead's intellectual properties; deny Whitehead's motion for injunction relief to move Wall Street to Richmond, Virginia; deny Whitehead's July 2, 2009 motion to consolidate his eight pending appeals and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Whitehead v. Strayer Univ. No. 1:08-cv-00832-MB-TCB (E.D. Va. filed Aug. 29, 2008 & entered Sept. 2, 2008; filed Sept. 8, 2009 & entered Sept. 9, 2008; filed & entered Sept. 11, 2008). 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. AFFIRMED 3

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?