Case Name: Isidoro RODRIGUEZ, Esq., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Danilo Devis PEREIRA, Defendant-Appellee, and HFP Incorporated, General Partner; Iota Partners, L.P.; Armada Company, General Partner; Sea Search Armada; Doe Entities 1-6; Murdock & Company; Edris E. Harbeston; Jack Harbeston; Jerome Barron; Dave Larocque; Don Middlebrook; Ed Carpenter; John Does 1-20, Defendants
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-01-24
Citations: 163 F. App'x 227
Docket Number: No. 05-2163
Parties: Isidoro RODRIGUEZ, Esq., Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Danilo Devis PEREIRA, Defendant—Appellee, and HFP Incorporated, General Partner; Iota Partners, L.P.; Armada Company, General Partner; Sea Search Armada; Doe Entities 1-6; Murdock & Company; Edris E. Harbeston; Jack Harbeston; Jerome Barron; Dave Larocque; Don Middlebrook; Ed Carpenter; John Does 1-20, Defendants.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 163
Pages: 227–228

Head Matter:
Isidoro RODRIGUEZ, Esq., Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Danilo Devis PEREIRA, Defendant—Appellee, and HFP Incorporated, General Partner; Iota Partners, L.P.; Armada Company, General Partner; Sea Search Armada; Doe Entities 1-6; Murdock & Company; Edris E. Harbeston; Jack Harbeston; Jerome Barron; Dave Larocque; Don Middlebrook; Ed Carpenter; John Does 1-20, Defendants.
No. 05-2163.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Jan. 19, 2006.
Decided Jan. 24, 2006.
Isidoro Rodriguez, Appellant Pro Se. Danilo Devis Pereira, Appellee Pro Se.
Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Isidoro Rodriguez appeals a district court's amended final judgment adopting in part the magistrate judge's report and recommendation and dismissing without prejudice his motion for a default judgment. We have reviewed the record and the district court's order and affirm for the reasons of the district court. See Rodriguez v. Pereira, No. CA-02-1523-GBL (E.D. Va. filed Sept. 19, 2005; entered Sept. 21, 2005). We deny Rodriguez's motions to disqualify the judges of this circuit court, for the issuance of a scheduling order and for permission to file a formal brief. We also deny the motion for 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