UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-1886
CHANDER KANT; ASHIMA K. KANT,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
versus
BREGMAN, BERBERT & SCHWARTZ, L.L.C.,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. William M. Nickerson, Senior District
Judge. (CA-02-2371-WMN)
Submitted: December 17, 2003 Decided: January 9, 2004
Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Chander Kant and Ashima K. Kant, Appellants Pro Se. Douglas Morton
Bregman, BREGMAN, BERBERT & SCHWARTZ, Bethesda, Maryland, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Chander and Ashima Kant appeal the district court's order
dismissing their civil rights complaint for failure to state a
claim upon which relief can be granted pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.
12(b)(6). We review a district court's dismissal for failure to
state a claim de novo. Duckworth v. State Admin. Bd. of Election
Laws, 332 F.3d 769, 772 (4th Cir. 2003). We must accept as true
the facts alleged in the complaint, view them in the light most
favorable to the plaintiff, and recognize that dismissal is
inappropriate unless it appears beyond certainty that the plaintiff
would be entitled to no relief under any state of facts that could
be proved in support of the claim. Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41,
45-46 (1957). Liberally construing the Kants’ complaint in
compliance with Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520-21 (1972), we
find that they assert conclusory allegations, unsupported by any
averment of facts. Thus, we find that the district court did not
err by dismissing the Kants’ complaint for failure to state a claim
pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6). Accordingly, we affirm the district
court's order. We dispense with oral argument because the facts
and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
- 2 -