OPEC v. UNITED NATIONS (2021)

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Adesijuola OGUNJOBI, Plaintiff - Appellant, Toks Banc Corp; Toks; 5 World Markets Corporation; World Markets Transfer Agency Corporation; Global Prosperity Corporation; United States of America; the People's Republic of China; Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC); Treasury Department of the United States; Federal Reserve Board of the United States; Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond; International Olympic Committee; Association of Tennis Professionals; Women's Tennis Professionals; International Tennis Federation; National Football League; National Basketball Association; Major League Baseball; Major League Soccer; Charles, Prince of Wales; Idris Elba, Actor, Singer, Producer; Sabrina Dhowre Elba, Fashion Model; Dak Prescott, Quarterback; Dallas Cowboys; Brian Allen, Offensive Lineman; Los Angeles Rams; Madonna Louise Ciccone, Singer, Songwriter; Democratic Party; Republican Party; Members of the Class and Subclasses, and those similarly situated; Commonwealth of Virginia; Donald J. Trump; Melania Trump; The Cincinnati Insurance Company, Plaintiffs, v. UNITED NATIONS; World Health Organization; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Defendants - Appellees.

No. 21-1694

Decided: September 21, 2021

Before MOTZ and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

Adesijuola Ogunjobi, Appellant Pro Se.

Adesijuola Ogunjobi appeals the district court's order dismissing for failure to state a claim his civil complaint in which he sought to file a class action against the United Nations, the World Health Organization, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention based on his contention that COVID-19 is a hoax. We have reviewed the record and find that his claims are frivolous. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's order. We grant Ogunjobi's motions to amend and deny his motions for an expedited decision and a stay pending appeal. 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Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

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