Court Opinion

ID: 9929744
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-03 21:00:59.682269+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:47:02.554658
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1908      Doc: 11         Filed: 02/02/2024    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 23-1908

        FENYANG AJAMU STEWART,

                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

                     v.

        GINA M. RAIMONDO, Hon., in her official capacity as Secretary, U.S. Department
        of Commerce; KATHI VIDAL, in her official capacity as Director, United States
        Patent & Trademark Office,

                            Defendants - Appellees.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
        Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:18-cv-01369-LMB-JFA)

        Submitted: January 30, 2024                                       Decided: February 2, 2024

        Before KING, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Fenyang Ajamu Stewart, Appellant Pro Se. Dennis Carl Barghaan, Jr., Assistant United
        States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia,
        for Appellees.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-1908         Doc: 11       Filed: 02/02/2024      Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Fenyang Ajamu Stewart appeals the district court’s order denying his Fed. R. Civ.

        P. 60(b)(2) motion for relief from judgment based on newly discovered evidence. Upon

        review, we discern no error in the district court’s ruling. Accordingly, we affirm the district

        court’s order. Stewart v. Raimondo, No. 1:18-cv-01369-LMB-JFA (E.D. Va. June 26,

        2023). 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