Michael Sindram v. Douglas Robelen


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [998422484-2]. Originating case number: 1:09-cv-01082-GBL-IDD. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998472118] [10-1928]

Download PDF
Michael Sindram v. Douglas Robelen Doc. 0 Case: 10-1928 Document: 11 Date Filed: 11/24/2010 Page: 1 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-1928 MICHAEL J. SINDRAM, Plaintiff Appellant, v. DOUGLAS B. ROBELEN, State Actor, Defendant Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge. (1:09-cv-01082-GBL-IDD) Submitted: November 18, 2010 AGEE, Circuit Decided: Judges, and November 24, 2010 HAMILTON, Senior Before SHEDD and Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael J. Sindram, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Dockets.Justia.com Case: 10-1928 Document: 11 Date Filed: 11/24/2010 Page: 2 PER CURIAM: Michael J. Sindram appeals the district court's order denying as frivolous his motion seeking leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal in No. 10-1374. The denial of in forma Roberts v. United We pauperis status is immediately appealable. States Dist. Ct., 339 U.S. 844, 845 (1950) (per curiam). have reviewed the record and conclude the appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal and dismiss the appeal for the reasons stated by the district court. See Sindram v. Robelen, No. 1:09-cv-01082-GBLWe IDD (E.D. Va. filed July 14, 2010 & entered July 15, 2010). 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. DISMISSED 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?