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UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed.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]
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UNPUBLISHED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Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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?