HANDY v. JOHNSON JOHNSON (2018)

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Aslam HANDY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON; Federal Reserve Board of Governors; Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing North America; Maximus, Inc., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 18-1003

Decided: May 29, 2018

Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Aslam Handy, Appellant Pro Se. Cameron Scott Matheson, MURPHY & MCGONIGLE, PC, Glen Allen, Virginia; Jonathan Holland Hambrick, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia; Jocelyn Renee Cuttino, MORGAN LEWIS & BOCKIUS, LLP, Washington, D.C.; Gregory David Grant, SHULMAN, ROGERS, GANDAL, PORDY & ECKER, PA, Potomac, Maryland, for Appellees.

Aslam Handy appeals the district court's order dismissing his civil complaint for lack of jurisdiction over several defendants, and for the failure to state a claim for relief against all defendants. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny as moot Handy's motions for an extension of time to file an informal reply brief and to file a supplemental brief, and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Handy v. Johnson & Johnson, No. 3:17-cv-00274-JAG (E.D. Va. Dec. 29, 2017). 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

PER CURIAM:

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes

A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.

Go to Learn About the Law