Arthur Gooden, II v. US

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 4:13-cv-00126-MSD-TEM Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999344757].. [13-2483]

Download PDF
Appeal: 13-2483 Doc: 7 Filed: 04/28/2014 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-2483 ARTHUR LEE GOODEN, II, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA; BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA; TONYA R. HENDERSON-STITH; CHRISTOPHER W. HUTTON; BONNIE L. JONES; TIMOTHY FISHER; VINCENT H. CONWAY; ALBERT PATRICK; GARY MILLS; BRYANT SUGG; RICHARD KURNS; ALFRED MASTERS; PAMELA JONES; WILLIAM H. SHAW; PETER TRENCH; MATHEWS; NELSON T. OVERTON; JANE & JOHN DOES, 1-100; JANE & JOHN DOES, A-Z (all officers of the Commonwealth of Virginia); JANE OR JOHN DOES, A-Z (all officers of the United States); JANE DOES I-X, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Newport News. Mark S. Davis, District Judge. (4:13-cv-00126-MSD-TEM) Submitted: April 24, 2014 Decided: April 28, 2014 Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Arthur Lee Gooden, II, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 13-2483 Doc: 7 Filed: 04/28/2014 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Arthur Lee Gooden, II, appeals the district court’s order dismissing his complaint entitled “criminal complaint for: genocide, civil rights offenses trafficking, and treason.” no reversible error. resulting in death, human We have reviewed the record and find Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Gooden v. United States, No. 4:13-cv-00126-MSD-TEM (E.D. Va. filed Oct. 8 & entered Oct. 14, 2013). legal before We dispense with oral argument because the facts and contentions this court are adequately and argument presented would not in aid the the materials decisional process. AFFIRMED 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?