Jaigobin v. U. S. Bank, N.A.

Full title: LEONARD JAIGOBIN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. U. S. BANK, N.A.; CHASE BANK…

Court: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Mar 16, 2020

No. 19-2116 (4th Cir. Mar. 16, 2020)

Opinion

No. 19-2116

03-16-2020

LEONARD JAIGOBIN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. U. S. BANK, N.A.; CHASE BANK, Defendants - Appellees, and JAMES E. CLARKE, ET AL, Substitute Trustees, Defendants.

Reuben B. Collins, II, R. B. COLLINS LAW, LLC, Waldorf, Maryland, for Appellant. Mary S. Diemer, NELSON MULLINS RILEY & SCARBOROUGH, LLP, Washington, D.C., for Appellees.

PER CURIAM

UNPUBLISHED

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, Senior District Judge. (8:18-cv-01776-DKC) Before KING, KEENAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Reuben B. Collins, II, R. B. COLLINS LAW, LLC, Waldorf, Maryland, for Appellant. Mary S. Diemer, NELSON MULLINS RILEY & SCARBOROUGH, LLP, Washington, D.C., for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Leonard Jaigobin appeals the district court's order dismissing his civil action against Defendants U. S. Bank, N.A., and Chase Bank for failure to state a claim. In his opposition to Defendants' motion to dismiss, Jaigobin requested leave to amend certain claims "if the [district] court determine[d] that the claims were not alleged with adequate sufficiency." (J.A. 105; see J.A. 104).^* On appeal, Jaigobin argues that the court erred in denying his request for leave to amend his complaint. "Where, as here, the plaintiff fails to formally move to amend and fails to provide the district court with any proposed amended complaint or other indication of the amendments he wishes to make, the district court does not abuse its discretion in denying leave to amend." Willner v. Dimon, 849 F.3d 93, 114 (4th Cir. 2017) (internal alterations and quotation marks omitted). Accordingly, we affirm the district court's judgment. 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.

* "J.A." refers to the joint appendix filed by the parties in this appeal. --------

AFFIRMED