Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Samih Fadl JAMMAL, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-06-09
Citations: 605 F. App'x 217
Docket Number: No. 15-1247
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Samih Fadl JAMMAL, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before KEENAN and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 605
Pages: 217–217

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Samih Fadl JAMMAL, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 15-1247.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: May 19, 2015.
Decided: June 9, 2015.
Samih Fadl Jammal, Appellant Pro Se. Jessica Dawgert, J. Max Weintraub, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C.; John Fulton Gianola, Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, WV, 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Samih Fadl Jammal appeals the district court's order granting the Government's motion for summary judgment and canceling Jammal's certificate of naturalization. We have reviewed the record and Jam-mal's arguments on appeal and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Jammal, No. 3:12-cv-07925, — F.Supp.3d -, 2015 WL 541941 (S.D.W.Va. filed Feb. 9, 2015 & entered Feb. 10, 2015). We deny Jam-mal's motion to strike the Government's response brief. 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.
Because we conclude that the district court correctly determined that the Government was entitled to judgment as a matter of law on the ground that Jammal committed unlawful acts that adversely reflected upon his moral character during the required statutory period, we need not reach the district court's alternate ground that Jammal committed acts constituting a crime involving moral turpitude during the statutory period.