From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Williams v. Law Office of John W. Conrad III, LLC

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Apr 12, 2013
518 F. App'x 180 (4th Cir. 2013)

Opinion

No. 12-2368

04-12-2013

DONTE R. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. LAW OFFICE OF JOHN W. CONRAD III, LLC; JOHN W. CONRAD, III; GINA NOGLE, Defendants - Appellees.

Donte R. Williams, Appellant Pro Se. John W. Conrad, III, LAW OFFICE OF JOHN W. CONRAD III, LLC, Towson, Maryland, for Appellees.


UNPUBLISHED

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (1:12-cv-03050-RDB) Before MOTZ, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Donte R. Williams, Appellant Pro Se. John W. Conrad, III, LAW OFFICE OF JOHN W. CONRAD III, LLC, Towson, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Donte R. Williams appeals the district court's order dismissing his civil action for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Williams v. Law Office of John W. Conrad III, LLC, No. 1:12-cv-03050-RDB (Oct. 22, 2012). 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

Williams v. Law Office of John W. Conrad III, LLC

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Apr 12, 2013
518 F. App'x 180 (4th Cir. 2013)
Case details for

Williams v. Law Office of John W. Conrad III, LLC

Case Details

Full title:DONTE R. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. LAW OFFICE OF JOHN W. CONRAD…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Apr 12, 2013

Citations

518 F. App'x 180 (4th Cir. 2013)

Citing Cases

Morris v. Mem'l Dev. Partners

Those claims must therefore also be dismissed for failure to state a claim for relief. See Williams v. L.…