U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 1999

Perelman v. Reno

Perelman v. Reno
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided April 20, 1999

Perelman v. Reno

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-1226

MOSHE PERELMAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus

JANET RENO; BILL CLINTON; COMMISSIONER DORIS OF THE IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE; IRENE WEISS; M. GRUGAL; GEORGE LLOYED; HOWARD MCKIBBEN; PHILIP PRO; EDWARD REED; DAVID HAGEN; J. RAWLINSON; PHYLLIS ATKINS; LAWRENCE LEAVITT; ROBERT JOHNSTON; ROGER K. HUNT; ROBERT MCQUAD; JOHN DOES; JANE DOES, Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District Judge. (CA-99-53-7)

Submitted: April 15, 1999 Decided: April 20, 1999

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

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Moshe Perelman, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Moshe Perelman appeals the district court’s order dismissing his action without prejudice for lack of venue. See 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a) (1994). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we af- firm on the reasoning of the district court. See Perelman v. Reno, No. CA-99-53-7 (W.D. Va. Feb. 3, 1999). 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

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.