Case Name: The CHRISTIAN SCIENCE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF the FIRST CHURCH OF CHRIST, Scientist; The Christian Science Publishing Society, Plaintiff-Appellees, v. David E. ROBINSON, Defendant-Appellant, and David J. Nolan; University of Christian Science; The Roan Mountain Institute of Christian Science and Health, Defendants
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-01-09
Citations: 1 F. App'x 157
Docket Number: No. 00-2029
Parties: The CHRISTIAN SCIENCE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF the FIRST CHURCH OF CHRIST, Scientist; The Christian Science Publishing Society, Plaintiff-Appellees, v. David E. ROBINSON, Defendant-Appellant, and David J. Nolan; University of Christian Science; The Roan Mountain Institute of Christian Science and Health, Defendants.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 1
Pages: 157–158

Head Matter:
The CHRISTIAN SCIENCE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF the FIRST CHURCH OF CHRIST, Scientist; The Christian Science Publishing Society, Plaintiff-Appellees, v. David E. ROBINSON, Defendant-Appellant, and David J. Nolan; University of Christian Science; The Roan Mountain Institute of Christian Science and Health, Defendants.
No. 00-2029.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Dec. 14, 2000.
Decided Jan. 9, 2001.
David E. Robinson, pro se. Joseph H. Lessem, Cowan, Liebowitz & Latman, P.C., New York, NY, for appellees.
Before WIDENER, WILKINS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
David E. Robinson appeals from the district court's orders granting the Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment, issuing a permanent injunction, dismissing as frivolous a number of Robinson's motions, and denying Robinson's motion for reconsideration in this trademark infringement case. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Christian Science Bd. v. Robinson, No. CA-99-148-1 (W.D.N.C. July 11 & July 24, 2000). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED.
Although the district court's orders are marked as "filed" on July 6, 2000, and July 21, 2000, respectively, the district court's records show that they were entered on the docket sheet on July 11, 2000, and July 24, 2000, respectively. Pursuant to Rules 58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date that the order was entered on the docket sheet that we take as the effective date of the district court's decision. Wilson v. Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986).