From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Stewart v. Ross

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Jan 21, 2021
No. 20-1514 (4th Cir. Jan. 21, 2021)

Opinion

No. 20-1514

01-21-2021

FENYANG STEWART, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. WILBUR L. ROSS, JR., Hon., in his official capacity as Secretary, U.S. Department of Commerce; ANDREI IANCU, in his official capacity as Director, United States Patent & Trademark Office, Defendants - Appellees.

Fenyang Ajamu Stewart, Appellant Pro Se. Catherine M. Yang, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellees.


UNPUBLISHED

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:18-cv-01369-LMB-TCB; 1:16-cv-00213-LMB-JFA) Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, MOTZ, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Fenyang Ajamu Stewart, Appellant Pro Se. Catherine M. Yang, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Fenyang Stewart appeals the district court's order (a) dismissing in part, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), the amended consolidated complaint in Stewart's consolidated employment actions, which related to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office terminating Stewart's employment in 2016; and (b) granting Defendants partial summary judgment on one of the claims asserted in the amended consolidated complaint. Upon review of the parties' arguments in conjunction with the record on appeal and the relevant authorities, we discern no reversible error in the district court's thorough and well-reasoned analysis. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Stewart v. Ross, Nos. 1:18-cv-01369-LMB-TCB; 1:16-cv-00213-LMB-JFA (E.D. Va. Apr. 17, 2020). We deny Stewart's motion for leave to supplement his informal brief and for the appointment of counsel. 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

Stewart v. Ross

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Jan 21, 2021
No. 20-1514 (4th Cir. Jan. 21, 2021)
Case details for

Stewart v. Ross

Case Details

Full title:FENYANG STEWART, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. WILBUR L. ROSS, JR., Hon., in…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Jan 21, 2021

Citations

No. 20-1514 (4th Cir. Jan. 21, 2021)