Case ID: f-appx_127/html/0118-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintif—Appellee, v. Luther BARTRUG, Defendant—Appellant, and Sandra B. Bartrug; Pahtrick Herry; Angela A. Saxon, Defendants.
    No. 04-2294.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: April 28, 2005.
    Decided: May 3, 2005.
    Luther Bartrug, Appellant pro se.
    Patricia McDonald Bowman, Thomas J. Clark, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C.; Robert P. McIntosh, Office of the United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Before WILLIAMS, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
   PER CURIAM:

Luther Bartrug appeals from the district court’s orders granting the motion of the Internal Revenue Service and amending the order of sale of his property, enjoining him from filing any further pleading in the case other than a notice of appeal, and denying his motions for reconsideration of those orders. We have reviewed the record and find no abuse of discretion and no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See United States v. Bartrug, No. CA-95-769 (E.D. Va. Aug. 19, Aug. 24, Sept. 10, & Oct. 14, 2004). 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