UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-7435
QUIRIN WEATHERSPOON,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
LORIN DANIEL HAY; PATRICIA WEST, Chief Judge of Virginia
Beach Circuit Court; WALTER S. FELTUN, Chief Judge of the
Virginia Court of Appeals; LARRY G. ELDER, Judge of the
Virginia Court of Appeals; ROBERT P. FRANK, Judge of the
Virginia Court of Appeals; SAM W. COLEMAN, III, Senior Judge
of the Virginia Court of Appeals; LEROY F. ROUNDTREE HASSEL,
SR., Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Virginia; CYNTHIA
D. KINSER, Justice of the Supreme Court of Virginia; LEROY
FRANCIS MILLETTE, JR., Justice of the Supreme Court of
Virginia; DONALD W. LEMONS, Justice of the Supreme Court of
Virginia; S. BERNARD GOODWYN, Justice of the Supreme Court
of Virginia; BARBARA MILANO KEEAN, Justice of the Supreme
Court of Virginia; LAWRENCE L. KOONTZ, JR., Justice of the
Supreme Court of Virginia; VIRGINIA ATTORNEY GENERAL’S
OFFICE, John Cook and Ellett Ohree, receiving agents of this
department; VIRGINIA STATE CORPORATION COMMISSION, Attention
Commissioners, Harold Robertson, receiving agent of this
department,
Defendants – Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior
District Judge. (1:09-cv-00732-CMH-IDD)
Submitted: November 13, 2009 Decided: February 16, 2010
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Quirin Weatherspoon, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
PER CURIAM:
Quirin Weatherspoon appeals the district court’s order
dismissing his complaint, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A (2006),
as frivolous. We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we deny all of Weatherspoon’s
pending motions and affirm for the reasons stated by the
district court. Weatherspoon v. Hay, No. 1:09-cv-00732-CMH-IDD
(E.D. Va. filed July 16, 2009 & entered July 17, 2009). 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
3