Michael Everrett Harris v. Judge Peter J. Messitte

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 8:12-cv-03807-RWT Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999769969]. Mailed to: Michael Everrett Harris 1439 Carol Drive Pomona, CA 91767-4573. [15-2011, 15-2012]

Download PDF
Appeal: 15-2011 Doc: 11 Filed: 03/08/2016 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-2011 MICHAEL EVERRETT HARRIS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. JUDGE PETER J. MESSITTE; ATTORNEY GENERAL LORETTA E. LYNCH, Defendants - Appellees. No. 15-2012 MICHAEL E. HARRIS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. U.S. JUDGE PAUL VICTOR NIEMEYER; LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Defendants - Appellees. Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Roger W. Titus, Senior District Judge. (8:12-cv-03807-RWT; 8:12-cv-03809-RWT) Submitted: January 6, 2016 Decided: March 8, 2016 Before WILKINSON and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Appeal: 15-2011 Doc: 11 Filed: 03/08/2016 Pg: 2 of 3 Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael Everrett Harris, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 Appeal: 15-2011 Doc: 11 Filed: 03/08/2016 Pg: 3 of 3 PER CURIAM: Michael Everrett Harris appeals the district court’s orders denying his motion for relief to reopen closed civil cases. Based on our review of the record in these cases and Harris’ informal briefs on appeal, we conclude that these appeals are frivolous. (1989). See Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325, 327 Accordingly, we dismiss the appeals. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012). See 28 U.S.C. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 3

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?