Steven Lamb v. Harold Clarke
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999581151-2] Originating case number: 1:15-cv-00268-CMH-TCB Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999644811]. Mailed to: appellant. [15-6464]
Appeal: 15-6464
Doc: 11
Filed: 08/21/2015
Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-6464
STEVEN PREVONCE LAMB,
Petitioner – Appellant,
v.
HAROLD CLARKE,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria.
Claude M. Hilton, Senior
District Judge. (1:15-cv-00268-CMH-TCB)
Submitted:
August 18, 2015
Decided:
August 21, 2015
Before WILKINSON and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Steven Prevonce Lamb, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 15-6464
Doc: 11
Filed: 08/21/2015
Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Steven
Prevonce
Lamb
appeals
the
district
court’s
order
dismissing this action without prejudice because of the absence
of a case or controversy.
no reversible error.
We have reviewed the record and find
Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in
forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal for the reasons stated by
the district court.
Lamb v. Clarke, No. 1:15-cv-00268-CMH-TCB
(E.D.
2015).
Va.
Mar.
20,
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
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?