Case Name: Paul Charles BIRD, a/k/a Paul Charles Bird, Sr., Debtor-Appellant, v. John E. DRISCOLL, III; Robert E. Frazier; Jana M. Gantt; Laura D. Harris; Kimberly Lane Bitt; Deena Reynolds; unknown Defendants 1 through 10; Huntington National Bank, as Successor to Union Federal Savings Bank, and Assigns; Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A., Defendants-Appellees, v. Monique D. Almy, Trustee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-10-22
Citations: 620 F. App'x 205
Docket Number: No. 15-1668
Parties: Paul Charles BIRD, a/k/a Paul Charles Bird, Sr., Debtor-Appellant, v. John E. DRISCOLL, III; Robert E. Frazier; Jana M. Gantt; Laura D. Harris; Kimberly Lane Bitt; Deena Reynolds; unknown Defendants 1 through 10; Huntington National Bank, as Successor to Union Federal Savings Bank, and Assigns; Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A., Defendants-Appellees, v. Monique D. Almy, Trustee.
Judges: Before MOTZ, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 620
Pages: 205–206

Head Matter:
Paul Charles BIRD, a/k/a Paul Charles Bird, Sr., Debtor-Appellant, v. John E. DRISCOLL, III; Robert E. Frazier; Jana M. Gantt; Laura D. Harris; Kimberly Lane Bitt; Deena Reynolds; unknown Defendants 1 through 10; Huntington National Bank, as Successor to Union Federal Savings Bank, and Assigns; Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A., Defendants-Appellees, v. Monique D. Almy, Trustee.
No. 15-1668.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Oct. 20, 2015.
Decided: Oct. 22, 2015.
Paul Charles Bird, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Harvey Hillman, Samuel I. White PC, Rockville, Maryland; Ronald S. Canter, Law Offices of Ronald '-S. Canter, LLC, Rockville, Maryland, for Appellees.
Before MOTZ, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Paul Charles Bird appeals the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the bankruptcy court judge and dismissing Bird's amended complaint filed as an adversary proceeding in the bankruptcy court. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Bird v. Driscoll, No. 1:15-cv01326-GLR (D.Md. May 20, 2015). We deny Bird's motion for the preparation of a transcript at government expense. 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.