From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Panowicz v. Sprint Nextel Corp.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Jul 5, 2011
437 F. App'x 239 (4th Cir. 2011)

Opinion

No. 11-1051.

Submitted: June 30, 2011.

Decided: July 5, 2011.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Liam O'Grady, District Judge (1:10-cv-00259-LO-TCB).

Before WILKINSON, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Mark A. Panowicz, Appellant Pro Se. Ronda Brown Esaw, McGUIREWOODS, LLP, McLean, Virginia; Hugh Scott Curtis, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


Mark A. Panowicz appeals the district court's order dismissing with prejudice his civil complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction and failure to state a claim. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(2), (b)(6). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court at the hearing held on September 24, 2010. Panowicz v. Sprint Nextel Corp., No. 1:10-cv-00259-LO-TCB (E.D. Va. Dec. 17, 2010; see Mot. Hr'g 15-22, ECF No. 36). 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

Panowicz v. Sprint Nextel Corp.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Jul 5, 2011
437 F. App'x 239 (4th Cir. 2011)
Case details for

Panowicz v. Sprint Nextel Corp.

Case Details

Full title:MARK A. PANOWICZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SPRINT NEXTEL CORPORATION…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Date published: Jul 5, 2011

Citations

437 F. App'x 239 (4th Cir. 2011)

Citing Cases

Panowicz v. Hancock

Both defendants moved to dismiss and those motions were granted, albeit without prejudice to Plaintiff's…