Syed v. Hercules Inc , 84 F. App'x 268 ( 2004 )

Opinions of the United
2004 Decisions States Court of Appeals
for the Third Circuit
1-13-2004
Syed v. Hercules Inc
Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential
Docket No. 02-1780
Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2004
Recommended Citation
"Syed v. Hercules Inc" (2004). 2004 Decisions. Paper 1096.
http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2004/1096
This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova
University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2004 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova
University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.
NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
No. 02-1780
SAJID L. SYED,
Appellant
v.
HERCULES INC., Plan Administrator and Fiduciary
of Income Protection Plan;
HERCULES INC., a Delaware corporation;
HERCULES INCORPORATED INCOME PROTECTION PLAN,
an employee welfare benefit plan
On Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Delaware
(D.C. Civ. No. 01-cv-00713)
Honorable Joseph J. Farnan, Jr., Chief Judge
Submitted under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)
January 12, 2004
BEFORE: BARRY, SMITH, and GREENBERG, Circuit Judges
(Filed January 13, 2004)
OPINION OF THE COURT
GREENBERG, Circuit Judge.
This matter comes on before this court on Sajid L. Syed’s appeal from orders
entered in the district court dated February 4, 2002, April 9, 2002, and April 10, 2002, as
a result of Syed’s ERISA claims. The case has a long history which the district court
summarized in its February 4, 2002 opinion. In view of this history there have been
numerous prior opinions in this case in both the district court and this court. See, e.g.,
Syed v. Hercules Inc., 214 F.3d 155 (3d Cir. 2000). These latest proceedings arise out of
an action Syed filed on October 25, 2001. In the circumstances we will not set forth the
background of the case as the parties are familiar with it. The order of the district court
dated February 4, 2002, granted appellees’ motion to dismiss; that of April 9, 2002,
denied Syed’s motion to amend his complaint; and that of April 10, 2002, denied his
motion for reconsideration.
We have jurisdiction on this appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We exercise
plenary review over the orders denying the motion to dismiss and reconsideration, see
John Hancock Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Olick, 151 F.3d 132, 134 (3d Cir. 1998), and review
the denial of the motion to amend for an abuse of discretion. See Garvin v. City of
Philadelphia, No. 03-1573, 2003 WL 23097078, at *3, F.3d (3d Cir. Dec. 31,
2003).
After a careful review of this matter we agree with the district court that this case
“borders on frivolous.” Indeed, we think that the court was generous to Syed when it
denied the appellees’ motion for sanctions.
The orders of February 4, 2002, April 9, 2002, and April 10, 2002, will be
2
affirmed.
TO THE CLERK:
Please file the foregoing not precedential opinion.
/s/ Morton I. Greenberg
Circuit Judge
3