Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 16 views

    Dickinson Adionser v. United States, 4th Cir. (2012)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Dickinson Norman Adionser appealed the district court's denial of relief on his civil complaint filed under the Privacy Act of 1974 and Declaratory Judgment Act against the United States and Drug Enforcement Administration. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error after reviewing the record. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument, determining the facts and legal contentions were adequately presented to the court.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    Dickinson Adionser v. United States, 4th Cir. (2012)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    16 views2 pages
    Dickinson Norman Adionser appealed the district court's denial of relief on his civil complaint filed under the Privacy Act of 1974 and Declaratory Judgment Act against the United States and Drug Enforcement Administration. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error after reviewing the record. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument, determining the facts and legal contentions were adequately presented to the court.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2012-11-27 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 12-7658

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Dickinson Norman Adionser appealed the district court's denial of relief on his civil complaint filed under the Privacy Act of 1974 and Declaratory Judgment Act against the United States and Drug Enforcement Administration. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error after reviewing the record. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument, determining the facts and legal contentions were adequately presented to the court.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    16 views2 pages

    Dickinson Adionser v. United States, 4th Cir. (2012)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Dickinson Norman Adionser appealed the district court's denial of relief on his civil complaint filed under the Privacy Act of 1974 and Declaratory Judgment Act against the United States and Drug Enforcement Administration. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error after reviewing the record. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument, determining the facts and legal contentions were adequately presented to the court.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 12-7658

    DICKINSON NORMAN ADIONSER,


    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA;
    ADMINISTRATION AGENCY,

    UNITED

    STATES

    DRUG ENFORCEMENT

    Respondents - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Greenbelt. Roger W. Titus, District Judge. (8:12cv-02524-RWT)

    Submitted:

    November 20, 2012

    Before TRAXLER,
    Judges.

    Chief

    Judge,

    Decided: November 27, 2012

    and

    SHEDD

    and

    FLOYD,

    Circuit

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Dickinson Norman Adionser, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Dickinson Norman Adionser appeals the district courts
    order denying relief on his civil complaint filed pursuant to
    the

    Privacy

    Declaratory

    Act

    of

    Judgment

    1974,
    Act,

    28

    U.S.C.
    U.S.C.

    552a
    2201

    (2006)
    (2006).

    reviewed the record and find no reversible error.


    we affirm.

    and

    materials

    the

    We

    have

    Accordingly,

    Adionser v. United States, No. 8:12-cv-02524-RWT (D.

    Md. Aug. 30, 2012).


    facts

    and

    legal
    before

    We dispense with oral argument because the

    contentions
    the

    court

    are

    adequately

    and

    argument

    presented

    would

    not

    in

    the

    aid

    the

    decisional process.

    AFFIRMED

    You might also like