Asemani v. United States , 283 F. App'x 160 ( 2008 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-1063
BILLY G. ASEMANI,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Andre M. Davis, District Judge. (1:05-cv-
02821-AMD)
Submitted: June 26, 2008 Decided: June 30, 2008
Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit
Judge.
Remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Billy G. Asemani, Appellant Pro Se. Ariana Wright Arnold, Melanie
Lisa Glickson, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore,
Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Billy Asemani seeks to appeal the district court’s order
granting the Government’s motion for summary judgment in this
Federal Tort Claims Act action. After the district court granted
the Government’s motion for summary judgment, Asemani filed a
timely notice of appeal. He then directed correspondence to the
district court contending that the court entered its order three
days before Asemani’s response to the Government was due pursuant
to the court’s notice under Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th
Cir. 1975). The district court construed Asemani’s correspondence
as a motion pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(1) and issued an
order indicating its inclination to grant Asemani’s post-judgment
motion. See Fobian v. Storage Tech. Corp., 164 F.3d 887, 891 (4th
Cir. 1999). Accordingly, we remand for the limited purpose of
permitting the district court to consider the merits of Asemani’s
response to the Government’s motion for summary judgment. See id.
at 892. In so doing, we express no opinion on the merits of
Asemani’s claims. We dispense with oral argument because the facts
and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
REMANDED
- 2 -