Case Name: In Re: MARINE ENERGY SYSTEMS CORPORATION, A South Carolina Corporation, Debtor. General Dynamics Corporation, Plaintiff, v. William J. Gilliam, Defendant-Appellant, v. CBS Corporation, formerly known as Viacom Inc.; Siemens Power Generation, Inc., formerly known as Siemens Westinghouse Power Corp., Third Party Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-09-06
Citations: 239 F. App'x 827
Docket Number: No. 06-2149
Parties: In Re: MARINE ENERGY SYSTEMS CORPORATION, A South Carolina Corporation, Debtor. General Dynamics Corporation, Plaintiff, v. William J. Gilliam, Defendant—Appellant, v. CBS Corporation, formerly known as Viacom Inc.; Siemens Power Generation, Inc., formerly known as Siemens Westinghouse Power Corp., Third Party Defendants—Appellees.
Judges: Before MICHAEL, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 239
Pages: 827–827

Head Matter:
In Re: MARINE ENERGY SYSTEMS CORPORATION, A South Carolina Corporation, Debtor. General Dynamics Corporation, Plaintiff, v. William J. Gilliam, Defendant—Appellant, v. CBS Corporation, formerly known as Viacom Inc.; Siemens Power Generation, Inc., formerly known as Siemens Westinghouse Power Corp., Third Party Defendants—Appellees.
No. 06-2149.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Aug. 17, 2007.
Decided: Sept. 6, 2007.
Wyatt B. Durrette, Jr., Christine A. Williams, Durrettebradshaw PLC, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellant. Henry E. Grimball, Buist Moore Smythe McGee, PA, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Before MICHAEL, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
William J. Gilliam appeals from the district court's order affirming the bankruptcy court's orders denying his motion for a continuance of the summary judgment hearing and granting summary judgment in favor of the Third-Party Defendants on Gilliam's third-party claims against them. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. General Dynamics Corp. v. Gilliam, Nos. 2:05-cv-02510-DCN; 97-bk-01929-JW; 04-bk-80020-JW (D.S.C. Sept. 28, 2006). 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.