Namish Parikh v. Brian Frosh
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 8:17-cv-00332-GJH. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000259081]. Mailed to: Namish Parikh. [17-2147]
Appeal: 17-2147
Doc: 19
Filed: 03/16/2018
Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 17-2147
NAMISH PARIKH,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
HON. BRIAN FROSH, In his capacity as Attorney General of Maryland,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt.
George Jarrod Hazel, District Judge. (8:17-cv-00332-GJH)
Submitted: February 28, 2018
Decided: March 16, 2018
Before TRAXLER, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Namish Parikh, Appellant Pro Se. Alexis Burrell Rohde, Assistant Attorney General,
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 17-2147
Doc: 19
Filed: 03/16/2018
Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Namish Parikh appeals the district court’s order dismissing this civil action
challenging Maryland’s prejudgment attachment procedure under the Fourth and
Fourteenth Amendments. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Parikh v. Frosh, No.
8:17-cv-00332-GJH (D. Md. Sept. 15, 2017). 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
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?