William D. Amos v. Virginia Employment Commission

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-2226
WILLIAM D. AMOS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
VIRGINIA EMPLOYMENT COMMISSION; DOLORES ESSER,
Commissioner, Virginia Employment Commission;
BILL JACOBS, Assistant Commissioner for Field
Operations, Virginia Employment Commission;
WOODY TUCKER, Chief of Benefits, Virginia
Employment Commission; AUNDY HOLLAND, Regional
Director, Virginia Employment Commission,
Petersburg/Tri-Cities Field Office; LINDA
DANIEL, Field Office Manager, Virginia
Employment Commission, South Boston Field
Office; KRISTINA SKELDON, Assistant Field
Office Manager/Hearing Officer, Virginia
Employment Commission, Farmville Field Office;
DIANE WILMOUTH, Assistant Field Office
Manager, Workforce Services Representative,
Virginia Employment Commission, South Boston
Field Office; SALLY HENDERSON, Hearing
Officer, Virginia Employment Commission,
Lynchburg Field Office; BARBARA WEEKS SMITH,
Hearing Officer, Virginia Employment
Commission, Danville Field Office,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Danville. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior
District Judge. (CA-05-5-JLK)

-- 1 of 3 --

- 2 -
Submitted: July 21, 2006 Decided: August 17, 2006
Before WILKINSON and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
William D. Amos, Appellant Pro Se. Ronald Nicholas Regnery, OFFICE
OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).

-- 2 of 3 --

- 3 -
PER CURIAM:
William D. Amos appeals the district court’s orders
denying Amos’ motion to amend, granting Appellees’ motion for
summary judgment, and denying Amos’ motions for reconsideration in
this civil action against his former employer and several
individual defendants. We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by
the district court. Amos v. Virginia Employment Comm’n, No. CA-05-
5-JLK (W.D. Va. July 13, Aug. 19 & Sept. 23, 2005). We dispense
with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument
would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED

-- 3 of 3 --