Salame Amr v. Attorney General of Virginia
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [998772314-2] Originating case number: 3:11-cv-00423-REP Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998812346]. Mailed to: Amr. [11-2171]
Appeal: 11-2171
Document: 28
Date Filed: 03/19/2012
Page: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-2171
SALAME M. AMR,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA; GREGORY C. FLEMING; RONALD
N. REGNERY; SCOTT CROWLEY; CROWLEY & CROWLEY LAW FIRM,
Defendants – Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond.
Robert E. Payne, Senior
District Judge. (3:11-cv-00423-REP)
Submitted:
March 15, 2012
Decided:
March 19, 2012
Before DUNCAN and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Salame M. Amr, Appellant Pro Se.
George Walerian Chabalewski,
Catherine Crooks Hill, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF
VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia; Scott Gregory Crowley, Sr.,
CROWLEY & CROWLEY, Glen Allen, Virginia; Charles James Williams,
III, BURNETT & WILLIAMS, Midlothian, Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 11-2171
Document: 28
Date Filed: 03/19/2012
Page: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Salame
M.
Amr
appeals
the
district
court’s
orders
granting the Defendants’ motions to dismiss and for sanctions.
We
have
reviewed
Accordingly,
we
the
deny
record
leave
and
to
find
proceed
no
in
reversible
forma
error.
pauperis
and
dismiss the appeal for the reasons stated by the district court.
Amr v. Attorney Gen. of Va., No. 3:11-cv-00423-REP (E.D. Va.
Sept. 22-23 & 26, 2011).
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.
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?