Case Name: Nashibkuma PATEL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. 7-ELEVEN, INC., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Seven and I Holdings Co., Ltd., Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-08-25
Citations: 613 F. App'x 243
Docket Number: No. 14-2359
Parties: Nashibkuma PATEL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. 7-ELEVEN, INC., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Seven and I Holdings Co., Ltd., Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before KEENAN and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 613
Pages: 243–244

Head Matter:
Nashibkuma PATEL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. 7-ELEVEN, INC., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Seven and I Holdings Co., Ltd., Defendant-Appellee.
No. 14-2359.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 29, 2015.
Decided: Aug. 25, 2015.
Gerald A. Marks, Justin M. Klein, Marks & Klein, LLP, Red Bank, New Jersey, for Appellant. Joseph J. Aronica, Duane Morris LLP, Washington, D.C., for Appellee.
Before KEENAN and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Nashibkuma Patel appeals the district court's order dismissing his amended complaint against 7-Eleven, Inc., and denying his oral motion for leave to file a second amended complaint. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), 15(a). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm. Patel v. 7-Eleven, Inc., No. 1:14-cv-00664-GBL-TRJ (E.D.Va. Nov. 14, 2014). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal con tentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED.