Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
- Rechtsrecherche mit Zugriff auf über 1 Million Quellen
- Dokumentenautomatisierung
- Mandatsverwaltung
- Gehostet in der EU und der Schweiz
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
00-6353•Haywood Williams, Jr v. Office of the United States Attorney
00-6353Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit06.06.2000
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-6353
HAYWOOD WILLIAMS, JR.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY; UNITED
STATES MARSHALS SERVICE,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. J. Calvitt Clarke, Jr., Senior Dis-
trict Judge. (CA-96-332-2)
Submitted: May 25, 2000 Decided: June 6, 2000
Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Haywood Williams, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Haywood Williams, Jr., appeals the district court’s order de-
nying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record
and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See
Williams v. Office of the United States Attorney, No. CA-96-332-2
(E.D. Va. Feb. 11, 2000). We dispense with oral argument because
the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the ma-
terials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED
-- 2 of 2 --
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.