UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-2437

LUTHER C. EDMONDS, Appellant,

ELITE CHILD, INCORPORATED, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus

SCHRODER CHESAPEAKE, INCORPORATED, t/a Green- brier Mall; E. PRESTON GRISSOM, individually and in his capacity of Judge, Judicial Circuit of Virginia, Circuit Court of the City of Chesapeake, Defendants - Appellees.

No. 00-1228

SHERRY D. BATTLE, Appellant,

ELITE CHILD, INCORPORATED, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus SCHRODER CHESAPEAKE, INCORPORATED, t/a Green- brier Mall; E. PRESTON GRISSOM, individually and in his capacity of Judge, Judicial Circuit of Virginia, Circuit Court of the City of Chesapeake, Defendants - Appellees.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CA-98-488-2)

Submitted: June 15, 2000 Decided: June 20, 2000

Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Cir- cuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Barry Ray Taylor, SCIALDONE & TAYLOR, INC., Virginia Beach, Vir- ginia, for Appellants; Sherry D. Battle, Appellant Pro Se. Alan Brody Rashkind, FURNISS, DAVIS, RASHKIND & SAUNDERS, Norfolk, Vir- ginia; Edward Meade Macon, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Luther C. Edmonds, Sherri D. Battle, and Elite Child, Inc., appeal the district court’s orders awarding sanctions and attorneys fees and enjoining Appellants from filing other federal lawsuits against Virginia state court judges absent authorization from a federal judge. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s orders and find that the district court did not abuse its discretion. See Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp., 496 U.S. 384, 400-02 (1990). Accordingly, we affirm. 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