William Davis, Jr. v. Department of State
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to consolidate case (Local Rule 12(b)) [1000013049-2]; denying Motion to remand case [1000005914-2], denying Motion to remand case [999993899-2]; denying Motion to vacate [1000000443-2]; denying Motion to appoint/assign counsel [999972370-2]; denying Motion for other relief [999964993-2] Originating case number: 4:13-cv-00058-RBS-DEM Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. . Mailed to: William Davis, Peter Teumer.. [16-2233]
Pg: 1 of 3
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
WILLIAM SCOTT DAVIS, JR.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
DEPARTMENT OF STATE; SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,
Defendants - Appellees,
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA; WAKE COUNTY NORTH
MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT; TOWN OF CARY NORTH CAROLINA,
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Newport News.
Rebecca Beach Smith,
Chief District Judge. (4:13-cv-00058-RBS-DEM)
January 31, 2017
February 2, 2017
Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
William Scott Davis, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.
Virginia; Peter Andrew Teumer, ROBEY TEUMER & DRASH, Norfolk,
Virginia, for Appellees.
Pg: 2 of 3
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 3 of 3
order dismissing his Freedom of Information Act complaint and
imposing upon him a prefiling review system for future civil
We have reviewed the record and find no reversible
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the
Davis v. Dep’t of State, No. 4:13-cv-00058-RBS-
DEM (E.D. Va. Aug. 19, 2016).
We deny all of Davis’ pending
motions, including his motions to remand, to vacate, to appoint
counsel, and to appoint a guardian ad litem.
We dispense with
argument would not aid the decisional process.
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?