Jack Amariglio-Dunn, and Travel Bank, a Division of A.P.E. International Limited v. John McCoy Individually and in His Capacity as C.E.O. Of Bank One Diane Steenman, Individually and in Her Capacity as President of Bank One Travel Corporation Denise MacErelli Individually and in Her Capacity as Executive of Bank One Travel Corporation Bank One Bank One Travel Corporation, N.A. Ralph Manaker, Individually and in His Capacity as President of Usts Southeast N.C. And Usts Southeast, Incorporated

Related Cases

4 F.3d 984

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Jack AMARIGLIO-DUNN, Plaintiff-Appellant,
and
TRAVEL BANK, a Division of A.P.E. International Limited,
Plaintiff,
v.
John MCCOY, Individually and in his capacity as C.E.O. of
Bank One; Diane Steenman, Individually and in her capacity
as President of Bank One Travel Corporation; Denise
Macerelli, Individually and in her capacity as Executive of
Bank One Travel Corporation; Bank One; Bank One Travel
Corporation, N.A.; Ralph Manaker, Individually and in his
capacity as President of USTS Southeast N.C. and USTS
Southeast, Incorporated, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 92-2375.

United States Court of Appeals,
Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 26, 1993.
Decided: September 8, 1993.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (CA-92-59-5-BO)

Jack Amariglio-Dunn, Appellant Pro Se.

Odes Lawrence Stroupe, Jr., Hunton & Williams, Raleigh, North Carolina; J. Michael Ozier, Bank One Corporation, N.A., Columbus, Ohio, for Appellees.

E.D.N.C.

AFFIRMED.

Before PHILLIPS, WILKINSON, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

1

Jack Amariglio-Dunn appeals from the district court's order granting summary judgment for Defendants in Amariglio-Dunn's trade secret infringement action. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Amariglio v. McCoy, No. CA-92-59-5-BO (E.D.N.C. Oct. 7, 1992). 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