Case Name: Timothy E. DAVIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SAMUEL I. WHITE, P.C.; Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., Defendants-Appellees, and Universal Composition Services, LLC; Altaf U. Khan, Defendants
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-04-12
Citations: 685 F. App'x 178
Docket Number: No. 16-1775
Parties: Timothy E. DAVIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SAMUEL I. WHITE, P.C.; Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., Defendants-Appellees, and Universal Composition Services, LLC; Altaf U. Khan, Defendants.
Judges: Before SHEDD and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 685
Pages: 178–179

Head Matter:
Timothy E. DAVIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SAMUEL I. WHITE, P.C.; Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., Defendants-Appellees, and Universal Composition Services, LLC; Altaf U. Khan, Defendants.
No. 16-1775
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: March 30, 2017
Decided: April 12, 2017
Bernard E. Goodman, David Ludwig, DUNLAP BENNETT & LUDWIG, PLLC, Vienna, Virginia; Roger C. Simmons, Shawn P. Cavenee, Christopher F. deBettencourt, GORDON & SIMMONS, LLC, Frederick, Maryland, for Appellant. Mary C. Zinsner, S. Mohsin Reza, TROUTMAN SANDERS LLP, Tysons Corner, Virginia; Allison Melton, TROUT-MAN SANDERS LLP, Virginia Beach, Virginia; Lisa Hudson Kim, SAMUEL I. WHITE, P.C., Virginia Beach, Virginia, for Appellees.
Before SHEDD and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Timothy E. Davis appeals from the district court's order dismissing his amended complaint in which he raised numerous claims arising out of the foreclosure on his property. We. have reviewed the record included on appeal, as well as the parties' briefs, and find no error in the district court's dismissal of Davis' claims. Specifically, we find no merit to Davis' claims asserting breach of fiduciary duty or breach of contract under Virginia law; nor do we find an actionable claim under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. 15 U.S.C. § 1692 (2012). Therefore we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Davis v. Samuel I. White, P.C., No. 1:16-cv-00036-CMH-JFA (E.D. Va. June 10, 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