From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Handy v. Johnson & Johnson

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
May 29, 2018
No. 18-1003 (4th Cir. May. 29, 2018)

Opinion

No. 18-1003

05-29-2018

ASLAM HANDY, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON; FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD OF GOVERNORS; TOYOTA MOTOR ENGINEERING & MANUFACTURING NORTH AMERICA; MAXIMUS, INC., Defendants - Appellees.

Aslam Handy, Appellant Pro Se. Cameron Scott Matheson, MURPHY & MCGONIGLE, PC, Glen Allen, Virginia; Jonathan Holland Hambrick, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia; Jocelyn Renee Cuttino, MORGAN LEWIS & BOCKIUS, LLP, Washington, D.C.; Gregory David Grant, SHULMAN, ROGERS, GANDAL, PORDY & ECKER, PA, Potomac, Maryland, for Appellees.


UNPUBLISHED

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. John A. Gibney, Jr., District Judge. (3:17-cv-00274-JAG) Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Aslam Handy, Appellant Pro Se. Cameron Scott Matheson, MURPHY & MCGONIGLE, PC, Glen Allen, Virginia; Jonathan Holland Hambrick, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia; Jocelyn Renee Cuttino, MORGAN LEWIS & BOCKIUS, LLP, Washington, D.C.; Gregory David Grant, SHULMAN, ROGERS, GANDAL, PORDY & ECKER, PA, Potomac, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Aslam Handy appeals the district court's order dismissing his civil complaint for lack of jurisdiction over several defendants, and for the failure to state a claim for relief against all defendants. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny as moot Handy's motions for an extension of time to file an informal reply brief and to file a supplemental brief, and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Handy v. Johnson & Johnson, No. 3:17-cv-00274-JAG (E.D. Va. Dec. 29, 2017). 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


Summaries of

Handy v. Johnson & Johnson

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
May 29, 2018
No. 18-1003 (4th Cir. May. 29, 2018)
Case details for

Handy v. Johnson & Johnson

Case Details

Full title:ASLAM HANDY, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON; FEDERAL RESERVE…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

Date published: May 29, 2018

Citations

No. 18-1003 (4th Cir. May. 29, 2018)