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)
11-6619•United States of America v. Michael J. Thompson
11-6619Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitOct 20, 2011
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-6619
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
MICHAEL J. THOMPSON,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, Senior
District Judge. (1:05-cr-00480-TSE-1)
Submitted: October 18, 2011 Decided: October 20, 2011
Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael J. Thompson, Appellant Pro Se. Kimberly Riley Pedersen,
Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Michael J. Thompson appeals the district court’s order
denying as moot his self-styled “Request for an Order on Final
Disposition on Petitioner’s Reply to Government’s Motion
Regarding Motion for Modification.” We have reviewed the record
and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the
district court’s order. See United States v. Thompson, No.
1:05-cr-00480-TSE-1 (E.D. Va. filed Apr. 12, 2011; entered Apr.
13, 2011). 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.