Jeffrey Pleasant v. Harold Clarke
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999598135-2] Originating case number: 3:15-cv-00218-REP-RCY Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999682848]. Mailed to: Jeffrey Pleasant. [15-6731]
Appeal: 15-6731
Doc: 11
Filed: 10/21/2015
Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-6731
JEFFREY A. PLEASANT,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director, Virginia Dept. of Corrections,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond.
Robert E. Payne, Senior
District Judge. (3:15-cv-00218-REP-RCY)
Submitted:
September 29, 2015
Decided:
October 21, 2015
Before WILKINSON, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jeffrey A. Pleasant, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 15-6731
Doc: 11
Filed: 10/21/2015
Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Jeffery
A.
Pleasant
appeals
the
district
court’s
order
denying his pleading titled “Notice of Removal of a Civil Action
Pursuant
to
28
U.S.C.
§
1446(b),”
dismissing
frivolous, and issuing a prefiling injunction. ∗
the record and find no reversible error.
the
action
as
We have reviewed
As the plaintiff in
the purported state court proceeding, Pleasant is not permitted
to remove the action to federal court, so the dismissal was not
error.
Accordingly, though we grant leave to proceed in forma
pauperis, we affirm the decision of the district court.
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.
AFFIRMED
∗
Pleasant does not challenge in his informal brief the
imposition of the prefiling injunction.
Thus, that portion of
the district court’s order is not before us.
See 4th Cir. R.
34(b).
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?