Edward Shlikas v. Arrow Financial Service

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:06-cv-02106-WDQ Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998906983]. Mailed to: Edward G. Shlikas. [12-1043]

Appeal: 12-1043

Doc: 42

Filed: 08/01/2012

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-1043

EDWARD G. SHLIKAS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
ARROW
FINANCIAL
SERVICES;
PIONEER
CREDIT
RECOVERY,
INCORPORATED; DIVERSIFIED COLLECTION SERVICES, INCORPORATED;
JEFFREY CARLINO; OSI EDUCATION SERVICES, INCORPORATED;
SALLIE MAE, INCORPORATED; GREAT LAKES HIGHER EDUCATION
GUARANTY
CORPORATION;
UNITED
STUDENT
AID
FUNDS,
INCORPORATED; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION,
Defendants – Appellees,
and
HEMAR; NORWEST, INCORPORATED; WELLS FARGO, INCORPORATED;
GOLDBERG SEGALLA LLP; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE
TREASURY; MARYLAND STATE COMPTROLLER OF THE TREASURY,
Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore.
William D. Quarles, Jr., District
Judge. (1:06-cv-02106-WDQ)

Submitted:

June 21, 2012

Decided:

Before NIEMEYER, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

August 1, 2012

Appeal: 12-1043

Doc: 42

Filed: 08/01/2012

Pg: 2 of 3

Edward G. Shlikas, Appellant Pro Se.
Rand Lewis Gelber, LAW
OFFICES OF RAND L. GELBER, Rockville, Maryland; Jonathan Edward
Claiborne,
WHITEFORD,
TAYLOR
&
PRESTON,
LLP,
Baltimore,
Maryland; Larry David Adams, Assistant United States Attorney,
Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Appeal: 12-1043

Doc: 42

Filed: 08/01/2012

Pg: 3 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Edward G. Shlikas appeals from the district court’s
orders entering judgment in favor of the Defendants on his civil
action and denying, in part, his motion for attorney fees and
costs.

We

error.

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the

district

have

reviewed

court.

Shlikas

the

v.

record

Arrow

and

Fin.

find

Servs.,

no

reversible

No.

1:06-cv-

02106-WDQ (D. Md. Nov. 17, 2007; June 5, 2008; May 4, 2009;
Aug. 26, 2010; Nov. 16, 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.
AFFIRMED

3