Case Name: Ebrahim RADBOD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Gabriel ARIAS, Corporal, Howard County Police Department, Defendant-Appellee, and Howard County, Maryland, Defendant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-05-17
Citations: 520 F. App'x 235
Docket Number: No. 12-2392
Parties: Ebrahim RADBOD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Gabriel ARIAS, Corporal, Howard County Police Department, Defendant-Appellee, and Howard County, Maryland, Defendant.
Judges: Before KEENAN, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 520
Pages: 235–235

Head Matter:
Ebrahim RADBOD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Gabriel ARIAS, Corporal, Howard County Police Department, Defendant-Appellee, and Howard County, Maryland, Defendant.
No. 12-2392.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: April 29, 2013.
Decided: May 17, 2013.
Ebrahim Radbod, Appellant Pro Se. David Reid Moore, Howard County Office of Law, Ellicott City, Maryland, for Appel-lee.
Before KEENAN, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Ebrahim Radbod appeals the district court's order entering judgment on the jury's verdict in his civil action in favor of defendant Corporal Gabriel Arias. We grant Radbod leave to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP") on appeal. Although there is no transcript of the jury trial in the record before us, we may authorize the preparation of a transcript at government expense where the litigant proceeds IFP and has shown the existence of a substantial question for appeal. 28 U.S.C. § 753(f) (2006). After reviewing the parties' informal briefs, we conclude that Rad-bod has not raised a substantial question for appeal. See Ortiz v. Greyhound Corp., 192 F.Supp. 903, 905 CD.Md.1959) (defining substantial question). Accordingly, we deny his request for a transcript at government expense, see Rhodes v. Corps of Eng'rs of U.S. Army, 589 F.2d 358, 359 (8th Cir.1978) (per curiam), deny as moot his motion to expedite the decision on his IFP application, and affirm the district court's order entering judgment on the jury's verdict. Radbod v. Arias, No. 1:10— cv-00897-RDB (D.Md. Oct. 11, 2012).
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.