UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

JOSEPH R. JOHNSON, 

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.  No. 01-1244 CIRCUIT CITY STORES, INCORPORATED;

FIRST NORTH AMERICAN NATIONAL

BANK,

Defendants-Appellees. 

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria.

Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge.

(CA-98-1407-A)

In Re: JOSEPH R. JOHNSON, 

 No. 01-6286 Petitioner. 

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

(CA-98-1407-A)

Submitted: June 29, 2001

Decided: September 10, 2001

Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

No. 01-1244 affirmed and No. 01-6286 petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
COUNSEL

Joseph R. Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Waller Trolinger Dudley, Robert J. Lloyd, III, MCGUIRE WOODS, L.L.P., McLean, Virginia, for

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c). 

OPINION

PER CURIAM: 

Joseph Johnson appeals the district court’s orders directing that

Johnson’s notice of dismissal not be filed in a closed case and denying his motions to set aside the judgment and for a hearing on the

matter. Johnson has also filed a petition for writ of mandamus

requesting that this court direct the district court to file the notice of

dismissal. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s orders

and find no reversible error. We therefore affirm the orders on the

reasoning of the district court. We deny Johnson’s mandamus petition

because he is not entitled to the relief he seeks. 

The Appellees have filed a motion for sanctions under Fed. R. App.

P. 38. Johnson’s filing of this appeal, asking the court to revisit litigation that was finally decided on its merits nearly two years ago, is sufficiently abusive to merit granting sanctions in favor of the Appellees.

In re Vincent, 105 F.3d 943, 945 (4th Cir. 1997). Johnson’s litigation

efforts are obviously misguided and it is clear from the record that he

has acted in bad faith. Chambers v. NASCO, 501 U.S. 32, 45-46

(1991). At this point, it appears that absent intervention by this court,

Johnson will continue to file frivolous appeals.* Johnson has had

*Aside from the appeals sub judice, Johnson has filed seven other

appeals involving the Appellees, all of which were frivolous. See Johnson v. Circuit City Stores, Inc., Nos. 99-2020, 99-2021, 99-2022, 00-

2144, 00-2145, 00-2146, 01-6078. 

2 JOHNSON v. CIRCUIT CITY STORES, INC.
notice from the court regarding the possibility of Rule 38 sanctions

and was afforded reasonable opportunity to respond and he has done

so. See Fed. R. App. P. 38. 

In lieu of particularized fees and costs, we order Johnson to pay

sanctions in the amount of $500.00. See Vincent, 105 F.3d at 945;

Brock v. Angelone, 105 F.3d 952, 954 (4th Cir. 1997). Additionally,

we enjoin Johnson from filing any further civil appeals in this court

until the monetary sanctions are paid, and unless a district court judge

certifies that his appeal is not frivolous. See Brock, 105 F.3d at 954.

We deny Johnson’s motion to waive copy requirements. 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. 

No. 01-1244 - AFFIRMED

No. 01-6286 - PETITION DENIED

JOHNSON v. CIRCUIT CITY STORES, INC. 3