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)
14-2359•Nashibkuma Patel v. 7-ELEVEN, INC., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Seven and I Holdings Co., Ltd
14-2359Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitAug 25, 2015
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-2359
NASHIBKUMA PATEL,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
7-ELEVEN, INC., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Seven and I
Holdings Co., Ltd,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District
Judge. (1:14-cv-00664-GBL-TRJ)
Submitted: July 29, 2015 Decided: August 25, 2015
Before KEENAN and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Gerald A. Marks, Justin M. Klein, MARKS & KLEIN, LLP, Red Bank,
New Jersey, for Appellant. Joseph J. Aronica, DUANE MORRIS LLP,
Washington, D.C., for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Nashibkuma Patel appeals the district court’s order
dismissing his amended complaint against 7-Eleven, Inc., and
denying his oral motion for leave to file a second amended
complaint. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), 15(a). We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,
we affirm. Patel v. 7-Eleven, Inc., No. 1:14-cv-00664-GBL-TRJ
(E.D. Va. Nov. 14, 2014). We dispense with oral argument
because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented
in the materials before this court and argument would not aid
the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.