Michael J. Sindram v. S. Randolph Sengel

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-2178
MICHAEL J. SINDRAM,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
S. RANDOLPH SENGEL; DIETRA Y. TRENT; MARK R.
WARNER,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior
District Judge. (CA-04-1-JCC)
Submitted: December 9, 2004 Decided: December 14, 2004
Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael J. Sindram, Appellant Pro Se. Alexander Francuzenko,
O’CONNEL, O’CONNELL & SARSFIELD, Rockville, Maryland; Martha
Murphey Parrish, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia,
for Appellees
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).

-- 1 of 2 --

*We agree with the district court that Sindram has a history
of filing vexatious and frivolous cases, many of which resulted in
meritless appeals. If Sindram continues this conduct, which waste
judicial resources, this court will consider ordering sanctions and
a pre-filing injunction.
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Michael J. Sindram appeals a district court order denying
his motion for reconsideration under Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure 60(b). We have reviewed the district court’s order and
the record and find the appeal frivolous. Sindram failed to allege
any proper grounds for reconsideration. Moreover, on appeal, he
failed to specifically challenge the district court’s findings in
this regard. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal as frivolous.* 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.
DISMISSED

-- 2 of 2 --