Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Kanazeh v. Priepeton, 4th Cir. (2003)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    19 views5 pages
    This document summarizes four consolidated appeals before the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. In each case, Afaf Kanazeh appealed district court orders granting motions to dismiss claims against various defendants. The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's rulings, finding that Kanazeh's appeals lacked merit. Additionally, the Court denied several motions filed by Kanazeh.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2003-03-10 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 02-2096

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document summarizes four consolidated appeals before the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. In each case, Afaf Kanazeh appealed district court orders granting motions to dismiss claims against various defendants. The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's rulings, finding that Kanazeh's appeals lacked merit. Additionally, the Court denied several motions filed by Kanazeh.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    19 views5 pages

    Kanazeh v. Priepeton, 4th Cir. (2003)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes four consolidated appeals before the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. In each case, Afaf Kanazeh appealed district court orders granting motions to dismiss claims against various defendants. The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's rulings, finding that Kanazeh's appeals lacked merit. Additionally, the Court denied several motions filed by Kanazeh.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 5

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 02-2096

    AFAF KANAZEH,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    KENNETH CROSSON; ARLEEN L. PRIEPETON,
    Defendants - Appellees,
    and
    MICHAEL K. MANN; PANTONG MANN; LAUREN SHEA;
    LOCKHEED MARTIN PC,
    Defendants.

    No. 02-2260

    AFAF KANAZEH,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    ARLEEN L. PRIEPETON; LOCKHEED MARTIN, PC,
    Defendants - Appellees,

    and
    MICHAEL K. MANN; PANTONG MANN; LAUREN SHEA,
    Defendants.

    No. 02-2261

    AFAF KANAZEH,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    ARLEEN L. PRIEPETON; LOCKHEED MARTIN, PC,
    Defendants - Appellees,
    and
    MICHAEL K. MANN; PANTONG MANN; LAUREN SHEA,
    Defendants.

    No. 02-2402

    AFAF KANAZEH,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    ARLEEN L. PRIEPETON;
    KENNETH L. CROSSON,

    LOCKHEED

    MARTIN

    PC;
    Defendants - Appellees,

    and
    MICHAEL K. MANN; PANTONG MANN; LAUREN SHEA,
    Defendants.

    Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior
    District Judge. (CA-02-1083-A)

    Submitted:

    January 27, 2003

    Decided:

    March 10, 2003

    Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Afaf Kanazeh, Appellant Pro Se. Geoffrey Martin Bohn, CUNNINGHAM


    & ASSOCIATES, Arlington, Virginia; Carol Thomas Stone, JORDAN,
    COYNE & SAVITS, L.L.P., Fairfax, Virginia, for Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    In these consolidated appeals, Afaf Kanazeh appeals district
    court orders granting the Appellees motions to dismiss.

    We have

    reviewed the record and the district court orders and affirm on the
    reasoning of the district court. See Kanazeh v. Priepeton, No. CA02-1083-A (E.D. Va. filed Aug. 2, 2002, entered Aug. 5, 2002; filed
    Aug. 30, 2002, entered Sept. 3, 2002; entered Oct. 21, 2002; filed
    Nov. 1, 2002, entered Nov. 4, 2002).

    We deny motions to strike

    filed in Nos. 02-2096 and 02-2260, the motion for appointment of


    counsel filed in No. 02-2096, and the motion for general relief
    seeking to add a new party filed in all appeals.

    We dispense with

    oral

    contentions

    argument

    because

    the

    facts

    and

    legal

    are

    adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument


    would not aid the decisional process.

    AFFIRMED

    You might also like