Court Opinion

ID: 9402878
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-06-17 21:00:35.275742+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:03.213415
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 21-2216      Doc: 20         Filed: 06/16/2023      Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                                UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 21-2216

        CHRISTOPHER YOUNG,

                             Plaintiff - Appellant,

                      v.

        ARGOS USA, LLC,

                             Defendant - Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Beaufort.
        Bruce H. Hendricks, District Judge. (9:19-cv-03073-BHH)

        Submitted: March 7, 2023                                           Decided: June 16, 2023

        Before AGEE and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        ON BRIEF: Joshua R. Fester, LAW OFFICE OF DARRELL THOMAS JOHNSON, JR,
        Hardeeville, South Carolina, for Appellant. Rodney A. Satterwhite, Igor Babichenko,
        MCGUIREWOODS LLP, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 21-2216      Doc: 20         Filed: 06/16/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Christopher Young appeals the district court’s order granting Argos USA, LLC’s

        motion to dismiss his complaint, in which Young raised claims of wrongful discharge in

        violation of public policy, defamation, retaliatory termination in violation of the False

        Claims Act (“FCA”), 31 U.S.C. § 3730(h), and abuse of process, as well as the court’s

        order denying Young’s motions for reconsideration and to amend his complaint. We have

        reviewed the record and found no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons

        stated by the district court. See Young v. Argos USA, LLC, No. 9:19-cv-03073-BHH

        (D.S.C. Oct. 26, 2020 & Sept. 21, 2021). 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

                                                    2