UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-1884
ISIDORO RODRIGUEZ, Esq.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
JACK HARBESTON; SEA SEARCH ARMADA; ARMADA
COMPANY; IOTA PARTNERS; DANILO DEVIS PEREIRA,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge.
(CA-00-1523-A)
Submitted: November 9, 2001 Decided: November 28, 2001
Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Isidoro Rodriguez, Appellant Pro Se. R. Harrison Pledger, Jr.,
Bernard G. Feord, Jr., PLEDGER & FEORD, P.L.C., McLean, Virginia,
for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Isidoro Rodriguez appeals the district court orders dismissing
his complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction. We review de novo
the district court’s legal conclusions concerning personal juris-
diction. To the extent that the district court’s conclusions are
based on findings of fact, however, such findings should not be
disturbed unless clearly erroneous. Mylan Lab., Inc. v. Akzo,
N.V., 2 F.3d 56, 60 (4th Cir. 1993). Rodriguez bears the burden of
showing by a preponderance of the evidence that jurisdiction
existed. In re Celotex Corp., 124 F.3d 619, 628 (4th Cir. 1997).
We have reviewed the record and the district court’s findings
and legal conclusions and find no error. Accordingly, we affirm on
the reasoning of the district court. See Rodriguez v. Harbeston,
No. CA-00-1523-A (E.D. Va. Dec. 21, 2000 & June 5, 2001). We deny
Rodriguez’s motion seeking certification of a question from the
Supreme Court of Virginia. We dispense with oral argument because
the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the ma-
terials before the court, and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED
2