From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bacchus v. Southeastern Mechanical Servs., Inc.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Nov 17, 2011
453 F. App'x 384 (4th Cir. 2011)

Opinion

No. 11-1890

11-17-2011

BRIAN BACCHUS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. SOUTHEASTERN MECHANICAL SERVICES, INCORPORATED, Defendant - Appellee.

Brian Bacchus, Appellant Pro Se. David W. Long-Daniels, Natasha L. Wilson, GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP, Atlanta, Georgia; John Francis Scalia, GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP, McLean, Virginia, for Appellee.


UNPUBLISHED

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Roger W. Titus, District Judge. (8:10-cv-01684-RWT)

Before NIEMEYER and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Brian Bacchus, Appellant Pro Se. David W. Long-Daniels, Natasha L. Wilson, GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP, Atlanta, Georgia; John Francis Scalia, GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP, McLean, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Brian Bacchus appeals the district court's order granting appellee's summary judgment motion. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Bacchus' motion for a subpoena and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Bacchus v. Southeastern Mech. Servs., Inc. , No. 8:10-cv-01684-RWT (D. Md. July 21, 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


Summaries of

Bacchus v. Southeastern Mechanical Servs., Inc.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Nov 17, 2011
453 F. App'x 384 (4th Cir. 2011)
Case details for

Bacchus v. Southeastern Mechanical Servs., Inc.

Case Details

Full title:BRIAN BACCHUS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SOUTHEASTERN MECHANICAL SERVICES…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Date published: Nov 17, 2011

Citations

453 F. App'x 384 (4th Cir. 2011)