U.S. Fourth Circuit: July 2009 Archives
U.S. Fourth Circuit - The FindLaw 4th Circuit Court of Appeals Opinion Summaries Blog

July 2009 Archives

Matrix Capital Mgmt. Fund, LP v. BearingPoint, Inc., No. 08-1035

In a securities fraud action, dismissal of the complaint is affirmed where plaintiffs failed to adequately plead scienter under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act. However, the "with prejudice" aspect of the dismissal is reversed where: 1) plaintiffs did not act in bad faith; 2) the filing of an amended complaint would not prejudice defendants; and 3) amendment would not be futile.

Read Matrix Capital Mgmt. Fund, LP v. BearingPoint, Inc., No. 08-1035

Appellate Information

Argued: January 29, 2009

Decided: July 31, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Michael

Counsel

For Appellants:

Solomon B. Cera, Gold, Bennett, Cera & Sidener, L.L.P., San Francisco, CA

Pamela A. Markert, Gold, Bennett, Cera & Sidener, L.L.P., San Francisco, CA

For Appellees:

Richard Louis Brusca, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, L.L.P., Washington, DC

Jennifer L. Spaziano, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, L.L.P., Washington, DC

Smith v. Ozmint, No. 07-6558

In an action against prison administrators under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) for forcibly shaving plaintiff's head in violation of his religious beliefs, summary judgment for defendants is reversed in part where they failed to meet their burden to show that their policy of forcible grooming was the least restrictive means to further a compelling governmental interest.

Read Smith v. Ozmint, No. 07-6558

Appellate Information

Argued: May 14, 2009

Decided: July 31, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Michael

Counsel

For Appellant:

Cecily Elizabeth Baskir, Georgetown University Law Center, Washington, DC

Steven H. Goldblatt, Georgetown University Law Center, Washington, DC

For Appellees:

Andrew Lindemann, Davidson & Lindemann, PA, Columbia, SC

Walker v. Prince George's Cty., No. 08-1462

In a 42 U.S.C. section 1983 action claiming that defendant-officer wrongfully seized plaintiff's wolf, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where the fact that a wolf may be lawfully possessed does not mean that the lawfulness of its possession must be verified as a prerequisite to its seizure when that seizure is necessary to protect the public safety or otherwise.

Read Walker v. Prince George's Cty., No. 08-1462

Appellate Information

Argued: May 14, 2009

Decided: July 30, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Justice O'Connor

Counsel

For Appellants:

Jason Christopher Crump, Smith Graham & Crump, LLC, Largo, MD

For Appellees:

Stephen Thibodeau, Prince George's County Office of Law, Upper Marlboro, MD

George & Co., LLC v. Imagination Entm't Ltd., No. 08-1921

In a trademark infringement action regarding the name of a dice game, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where: 1) there was no evidence that consumers linked the mark at issue to plaintiff, and such evidence is generally thought to be the most direct and persuasive way of establishing secondary meaning; and 2) plaintiff presented no meaningful evidence that defendant wished to capitalize on plaintiff's mark.

Read George & Co., LLC v. Imagination Entm't Ltd., No. 08-1921

Appellate Information

Argued May 12, 2009

Decided July 27, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Hamilton

Counsel

For Appellant:

Mark S. Sommers, Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, Washington, DC

For Appellees:

William Francis Krebs, Bean, Kinney & Korman, PC, Arlington, VA

US v. Cameron, No. 08-4277

Defendant's counterfeiting conviction is affirmed where the evidence created a more than reasonable inference that defendant manufactured the counterfeit bills found in his residence. However, his sentence is vacated and remanded where the government failed to prove that defendant was an organizer or leader in the conspiracy.

Read US v. Cameron, No. 08-4277

Appellate Information

Argued: May 15, 2009

Decided: July 21, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Gregory

Counsel

For Appellant:

Jonathan D. Byrne, Office of the Federal Public Defender, Charleston, WV

For Appellee:

Steven Loew, Office of the United States Attorney, Charleston, WV

EEOC v. Central Wholesalers, Inc., No. 08-1181

In a Title VII action by the EEOC claiming that defendant subjected an employee to a hostile work environment based on her gender and race, summary judgment for defendant is reversed where the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the EEOC, would allow a reasonable jury to conclude that the harassment was: 1) unwelcome; 2) based on plaintiff's gender or race; 3) sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of her employment and create an abusive atmosphere; and 4) imputable to defendant.

Read EEOC v. Central Wholesalers, Inc., No. 08-1181

Appellate Information

Argued: March 27, 2009

Decided: July 21, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Shedd

Counsel

For Appellant:

Daniel Travis Vail, U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Washington, DC,

For Appellee:

Fred Saul Sommer, Shulman, Rogers, Gandal, Pordy & Ecker, PA, Rockville, MD

US v. Ricks, No. 07-5127

Defendant's firearm possession conviction is reversed where the district court erred in denying defendant's proposed justification instruction because a reasonable trier of fact could have found that defendant's possession was justified as self-defense.

Read US v. Ricks, No. 07-5127

Appellate Information

Argued: March 26, 2009

Decided: July 20, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Gregory

Counsel

For Appellant:

Ross Hall Richardson, Federal Defenders of Western North Carolina, Inc., Charlotte, NC

For Appellee:

Adam Christopher Morris, Office of the United States Attorney, Charlotte, NC

Baum v. Rushton, No. 07-7589

In habeas proceedings following a murder prosecution, denial of a habeas petition is affirmed where retrying petitioner following a mistrial due to the discovery of the victim's body did not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause because petitioner failed to rebut a factual determination that the victim's body did not constitute "critical" prosecution evidence.

Read Baum v. Rushton, No. 07-7589

Appellate Information

Argued: January 28, 2009

Decided: July 16, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge King

Dissent by Judge Gregory

Counsel

For Appellant:

John Henry Blume, III, Blume, Weyble & Norris, L.L.C., Columbia, SC

For Appellee:

Melody Jane Brown, Office of the Attorney General of South Carolina, Columbia, SC

Philips v. Pitt Cty. Mem. Hosp., No. 07-1986

In a 42 U.S.C. section 1983 action based on the suspension of Plaintiff's practice privileges at Defendant hospital, the dismissal of the complaint is affirmed, where the hospital was not a state actor because the members of its board were not employees of or controlled by the county.

Read Philips v. Pitt Cty. Mem. Hosp., No. 07-1986

Appellate Information

Argued: October 29, 2008

Decided: July 13, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Copenhaver

Counsel

For Appellant:

Karin Marshall Zaner, Kane, Russell, Coleman & Logan, Dallas, TX

For Appellees:

Charles David Creech, Harris, Creech, Ward & Blackerby, New Bern, NC

US v. White, No. 08-4492

Defendant's firearm possession sentence is affirmed where the state offense underlying one of his previous convictions, conspiracy to commit robbery with a dangerous weapon, constituted a "violent felony" under the Armed Career Criminal Act.

Read US v. White, No. 08-4492

Appellate Information

Argued: May 15, 2009

Decided: July 6, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge King

Counsel

For Appellant:

Mark Patrick Foster, Jr., Law Offices of Mark Foster, PC, Charlotte, NC

For Appellee:

Adam Christopher Morris, Office of the United States Attorney, Charlotte, NC

Gomis v. Holder, No. 08-1389

Petitioner's petition for review of the BIA's denial of her application for asylum is denied, where the Court of Appeals lacked jurisdiction to review the BIA's determination that Petitioner did not meet the changed or extraordinary circumstances exception.

Read Gomis v. Holder, No. 08-1389

Appellate Information

Argued: March 25, 2009

Decided: July 6, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Niemeyer

Partial Concurrence and Partial Dissent by Judge Gregory

Counsel

For Petitioner:

Kell Enow, Enow & Patcha, Silver Spring, MD

For Respondent:

Andrew B. Insenga, United States Department of Justice, Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC

US v. Blake, No. 07-4619

Defendant's carjacking conviction is affirmed, where the District Court did not err in refusing to suppress his post-arrest statements, because no evidence suggested that the arresting officer's provision of a statement of charges was anything other than an action normally attendant to arrest and custody.

Read US v. Blake, No. 07-4619

Appellate Information

Argued: May 15, 2009

Decided: July 2, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Traxler

Counsel

For Appellant:

Kenneth Wendell Ravenell, Baltimore, MD

For Appellee:

John Francis Purcell, Jr., Office of the United States Attorney, Baltimore, MD

586zwe2tvy

Muffley v. Spartan Mining Co., No. 08-1973

In an action by the NLRB seeking an injunction requiring Defendant to offer employment to persons it had refused to hire because of union affiliation, judgment for Plaintiff is affirmed where the District Court properly considered the balance of harms and other equitable factors in issuing the injunction.

Read Muffley v. Spartan Mining Co., No. 08-1973

Appellate Information

Argued: May 12, 2009

Decided: July 1, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Motz

Counsel

For Appellant:

Forrest Hansbury Roles, Dinsmore & Shohl LLP, Charleston, WV

For Appellee:

Laura T. Vazquez, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, DC