UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-2383

FRANK PAUL LUKACS, Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

DONNA E. SHALALA, SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES; HAROLD E. VARMUS, Doctor, Director, National Institute of Health; BERNADINE HEALY, Doctor, Dean, College of Medicine, Ohio State University; RUTH KIRSCHSTEIN, Doctor, Deputy Director, NationalInstitute of Health; NAOMI CHURCHILL, Director, Office of Equal Employment Opportunity; DIANE ARMSTRONG, National Institute of Health; LINDA MORRIS, Acting Director, Office of Equal Opportunity; GILBERT F. CASELLAS, Director, United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission; RONNIE BLUMENTHAL, Director, Office of Federal Operations, United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission; LORETTA Y. WATSON, Chief, Intake and Control Branch Compliance and Control Division Office of Federal Operations; JAMES KING, Director, Office of Personnel Management; RICHARD KLAUSNER, Doctor, Director, National Cancer Institute; EDWARD SONDIK, Doctor, Director, NCHS, Defendants - Appellees.2 No. 98-2384

FRANK PAUL LUKACS, Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

DONNA E. SHALALA, SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES; HAROLD E. VARMUS, Doctor, Director, National Institute of Health; RUTHKIRSCHSTEIN, Deputy Director, National Institute of Health; RICHARD KLAUSNER, Doctor, Director, National Cancer Institute; NAOMI CHURCHILL, Director; DIANE ARMSTRONG, FormerDirector, OEO NIH; LINDA MORRIS, Acting Director; JANET RENO, United States Attorney General; GILBERT F. CASELLAS, Director; JAMESKING, Director, Office of Personnel Management; JANICE LACHANCE, Director, Office of Personnel Management; BERNADINE HEALY, Doctor, Dean; EDWARD SONDIK, Doctor, Director NCHS; PHILIP AMORUSO, Executive Director, National Cancer Institute; MAXINE RICHARDSON, EqualOpportunity Manager, National Cancer Institute; SANDRA THOMAS, Equal Employment Opportunity Manager, National Cancer Institute; MARIANNE WAGNER, Personnel Officer, National Cancer Institute; BEVERLY LOTT WYATT, Chief, Research Contracts Branch; DAVID SNIGHT, Chief, Research Contracts Branch; THOMAS MAYS, Doctor, Director, National Cancer Institute OTD; KATHLEEN SYBERT, Doctor, Deputy Director, National Cancer Institute OTD; DARYL SANDRA CHAMBLEE, Acting Director, Science Policy andTechnology Transfer; JOHN FOLEY, Former Director, Division of Procurement, Defendants - Appellees.3 No. 98-2386

FRANK PAUL LUKACS, Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

DONNA E. SHALALA, SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES; HAROLD E. VARMUS, Doctor; RICHARD KLAUSNER, Doctor; NAOMI CHURCHILL,Director, Office of Equal Employment Opportunity, National Institute of Health; DIANE ARMSTRONG, Former Director, OEO, National Institute of Health; LINDA MORRIS, ActingDirector, Office of Equal Employment Opportunity, National Institute of Health; PHILIP AMORUSO, Associate Director, National Cancer Institute; THOMAS MAYS, Doctor, Director,National Cancer Institute, Office of Technology Development; KATHLEEN SYBERT, Doctor, Deputy Director, National Cancer Institute, Office of Technology Development; RUTHKIRSCHSTEIN, Deputy Director, National Institute of Health; GILBERT F. CASELLAS, Director, United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission; JAMES KING, Director, Office of Personnel Management; JANET RENO, United States Attorney General, Defendants - Appellees.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the District ofMaryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, District Judge. (CA97-379-PJM, CA-97-3359-PJM, CA-97-3495-PJM)
Submitted: February 23, 1999 Decided: March 19, 19994 Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Frank Paul Lukacs, Appellant Pro Se. George Levi Russell, III, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).5 PER CURIAM: Frank P. Lukacs appeals the district court’s dismissal of these civil actions as presenting duplicative claims to two other of his cases pending before the same district court. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Lukacs v. Shalala, Nos. CA-97-379-PJM; CA-97- 3359-PJM; CA-97-3495-PJM (D. Md. Sept. 4, 1998). We grant Lukacs’ motions to file attachments to his informal brief and deny his motions to consolidate these appeals with a fourth case. 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