Case ID: f-appx_473/html/0201-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

In re: MINH VU HOANG, Debtor, Minh Vu Hoang, Defendant-Appellant, v. UHY Advisors Flys, Inc., Third Party Defendant-Appellee, and Gary A. Rosen, Trustee. In re Minh Vu Hoang; Thanh Hoang Debtors, Minh Vu Hoang, Defendant-Appellant, v. Gary A. Rosen; Roger Schlossberg, Trustees-Appellees. In re Minh Vu Hoang, Debtor, Minh Vu Hoang, Defendant-Appellant, v. Marion A. Hecht; Jeffrey K. Bernstein; Goodman Solutions, LLC; Goodman & Company, LLP, Third Party Defendants-Appellees, and Roger Schlossberg; Gary A. Rosen, Trustees. In re Minh Vu Hoang, Debtor, Minh Vu Hoang, Defendant-Appellant, v. Gary A. Rosen; Trustee Roger Schlossberg, Third Party Defendants-Appellees, and Gary A. Rosen, Individually; Gary A. Rosen, Chartered, Trustees.
    Nos. 12-1001, 12-1003, 12-1004, 12-1005.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: May 31, 2012.
    Decided: June 5, 2012.
    Minh Vu Hoang, Appellant Pro Se. Alan M. Grochal, Catherine Keller Hopkin, Tydings & Rosenberg, LLP, Baltimore, Maryland; Gary A. Rosen, Rockville, Maryland; Roger Schlossberg, Schlossberg & Associates, Hagerstown, Maryland, for Appellees.
    Before KING, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
   PER CURIAM:

In these consolidated appeals, Minh Vu Hoang appeals the district court’s orders dismissing as frivolous her appeal from the bankruptcy court’s orders in the underlying proceedings. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Hoang v. UHY Advisors FKYS, Inc., Nos. 8:11-cv02641-DKC; 05-21078; 11-00001; Hoang v. Rosen, Nos. 8:11-cv02642-DKC; 05-21078; 11-00001; Hoang v. Hecht, Nos. 8:11—cv02653-DKC; 05-21078; 11-00001; Hoang v. Gary Rosen, Nos. 8:11-cv-02654-DKC; 05-21078; 11-00001; (D.Md. Dec. 13, 2011). We deny Hoang’s motion to appoint counsel and 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.