The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
04-2305•Joseph T. Watkins v. Robert L. Ehrlich, Jr
04-2305Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitApr 20, 2005
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-2305
JOSEPH T. WATKINS; JOHNNIE S. WATKINS,
(Mrs.),
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
versus
ROBERT L. EHRLICH, JR.; VINYL TECHNOLOGIES,
INCORPORATED,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge.
(CA-04-2813-AW)
Submitted: February 23, 2005 Decided: April 20, 2005
Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Joseph T. Watkins, Johnnie S. Watkins, Appellants Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Joseph T. and Johnnie S. Watkins appeal the district
court’s order dismissing their complaint for want of subject matter
jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the
district court. See Watkins v. Ehrlich, No. CA-04-2813-AW (D. Md.
Sept. 16, 2004). 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 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.