Case ID: f-appx_697/html/0255-01.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

Richard POLIDI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CHESHIRE PARKER SCHNEIDER & BRYAN, PLLC; Alan Schneider; John Does 1-3, Defendants-Appellees. Richard Polidi, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Carmen Hoyme Bannon, in each of her official and individual capacities; Douglas Bell, Defendants-Appellees, and The North Carolina State Bar, an Agency of the State of North Carolina; Wayne Truax, in each of his official and individual capacities; Katherine Jean, in each of her official and individual capacities; John Does 1-10; John Does 1-5, Defendants.
    No. 17-1122, No. 17-1124
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: September 26, 2017
    Decided: September 28, 2017
    Richard Polidi, Appellant Pro Se.
    Before NIEMEYER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
   Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Richard Polidi appeals the district court’s orders dismissing his 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985 (2012) complaints under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012) and denying his Motion to Set Aside Order and for a New Hearing. We have reviewed the records and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Polidi v. Cheshire Parker Schneider & Bryan, PLLC, No. 1:16-cv-01534-TSE-MSN (E.D. Va. Dec. 22, 2016; Jan. 25, 2017); Polidi v. Bannon, No. 1:16-cv-01535-TSE-MSN (E.D. Va. Dec. 28, 2016; filed Dec. 29, 2016 & entered Dec. 30, 2016). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before ' this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED 
      
       The district court declined to exercise jurisdiction over Polidi’s state law claims, dismissing them without prejudice. See 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3) (2012).