Case ID: f-appx_169/html/0165-01.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

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ex rel. Jerry A. Hurst, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION, Defendant—Appellee, and United States of America, Party-in-Interest.
    No. 05-2166.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Feb. 23, 2006.
    Decided Feb. 28, 2006.
    
      Jerry A. Hurst, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Arthur Umayam, Deneen J. Me-lander, Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson, LLP, Washington, DC, for Appellee.
    Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
   PER CURIAM:

Jerry A. Hurst appeals from the district court’s orders dismissing his complaint as filed beyond the limitations periods and on res judicata grounds, and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Hurst v. Northrop Grumman Corp., No. CA-04-1205-1 (E.D. Va. Aug. 17, 2005 & filed Sept. 15, 2005; entered Sept. 16, 2005). 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