Case Name: Stephen G. STERNER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. WOODFOREST NATIONAL BANK; Bryan Abraham, Woodforest National Bank Representative; Lisa Cotton, Woodforest National Bank Ex. Vice President, Defendants-Appellees. Stephen George Sterner, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Woodforest National Bank; Woodforest Bank, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-10-23
Citations: 585 F. App'x 63
Docket Number: Nos. 14-1683, 14-1684
Parties: Stephen G. STERNER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. WOODFOREST NATIONAL BANK; Bryan Abraham, Woodforest National Bank Representative; Lisa Cotton, Woodforest National Bank Ex. Vice President, Defendants-Appellees. Stephen George Sterner, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Woodforest National Bank; Woodforest Bank, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 585
Pages: 63–63

Head Matter:
Stephen G. STERNER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. WOODFOREST NATIONAL BANK; Bryan Abraham, Woodforest National Bank Representative; Lisa Cotton, Woodforest National Bank Ex. Vice President, Defendants-Appellees. Stephen George Sterner, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Woodforest National Bank; Woodforest Bank, Defendants-Appellees.
Nos. 14-1683, 14-1684.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Oct. 21, 2014.
Decided: Oct. 23, 2014.
Stephen G. Sterner, Appellant Pro Se.
Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
In these consolidated appeals, Stephen G. Sterner challenges the district court's orders denying his motion to amend his complaint in the action underlying Appeal No. 14-1684, and denying his motion for reconsideration of the district court's orders: (1) dismissing the actions underlying both appeals; and (2) denying his motion to amend. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Sterner v. Woodforest Nat'l Bank, Nos. 1:13-cv-00229-MR-DLH, 1:14-cv-00092-MR-DLH (W.D.N.C. June 17, 2014; July 3, 2014). 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.