Case Name: In re MICHAEL'S ENTERPRISES OF VIRGINIA, INC., Debtor. Michael's Enterprises of Virginia, Inc., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Branch Banking and Trust Company, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-04-06
Citations: 643 F. App'x 304
Docket Number: No. 15-1807
Parties: In re MICHAEL’S ENTERPRISES OF VIRGINIA, INC., Debtor. Michael’s Enterprises of Virginia, Inc., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Branch Banking and Trust Company, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before WILKINSON and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Bankruptcy Reporter
Volume: 554
Pages: 304–304

Head Matter:
In re MICHAEL’S ENTERPRISES OF VIRGINIA, INC., Debtor. Michael’s Enterprises of Virginia, Inc., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Branch Banking and Trust Company, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 15-1807.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Feb. 25, 2016.
Decided: April 6, 2016.
Lee Robert Arzt, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellant. Trevor B. Reid, Stephen E. Scarce, Meredith L. Yoder, Parker, Pollard, Wilton & Peaden, P.C., Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before WILKINSON and FLOYD, 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Michael's Enterprises of Virginia, Inc., appeals from the district court's order affirming the bankruptcy court's order imposing sanctions upon it, its president/sole shareholder, and its attorney after determining that Michael's bankruptcy petition was filed for an improper purpose. We have reviewed the record and the parties' arguments on appeal, and we find no abuse of discretion by the bankruptcy court in imposing sanctions. See In re Weiss, 111 F.3d 1159, 1169 (4th Cir.1997). Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Michael's Enters. of Va., Inc. v. Branch Banking & Trust Co., No. 3:14-cv-00829-REP (E.D. Va. June 19, 2015). 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.
In making this determination, we do not rely upon the bankruptcy court's analysis as to when a transfer occurred,