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)
12-1796•Marquette Bradley v. Johnson & Johnson; Amgen; Janssen Biotech
12-1796Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit13.09.2012
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-1796
MARQUETTE BRADLEY,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
JOHNSON & JOHNSON; AMGEN; JANSSEN BIOTECH,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior
District Judge. (1:12-cv-00092-JCC-IDD)
Submitted: September 11, 2012 Decided: September 13, 2012
Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Marquette Bradley, Appellant Pro Se. Jon M. Talotta, HOGAN
LOVELLS US LLP, McLean, Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Marquette Bradley appeals the district court’s order
denying his complaint alleging wrongful death without prejudice.
We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. Bradley v. Johnson & Johnson, No. 1:12-cv-00092-JCC-IDD
(E.D. Va. May 30, 2012). 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
-- 2 of 2 --
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.