Arthur Wadley v. J. R. Tobacco Co., 2 F.3d 1150 (4th Cir. 1993). · Go Syfert
Search
Arthur Wadley v. J. R. Tobacco Co., 2 F.3d 1150 (4th Cir. 1993). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
17 citation events (3 in the last 25 years) across 4 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Cooperative Entertainment, Inc. v. Kollective Technology, Inc. (cand, 2021-06-21)
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Cooperative Entertainment, Inc. v. Kollective Technology, Inc.
N.D. Cal. · 2021 · confidence medium
Cir. 2016) 21 (finding claims abstract where the “specification fails to provide any technical details for the 22 tangible components” and “instead predominately describes the system and methods in purely 23 functional terms”); Affinity Labs, 838 F.3d at 1257 (holding that claim is abstract at step one 24 because “it claims the general concept of out-of-region delivery of broadcast content through the 25 use of conventional devices, without offering any technological means of effecting that concept”). 26 CEI does not address the Federal Circuit case law cited above or in Kollective…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Arthur Wadley
v.
J. R. Tobacco Company
93-1326.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
Aug 5, 1993.
2 F.3d 1150
Unpublished

2 F.3d 1150

63 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. 352

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Arthur WADLEY, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
J. R. TOBACCO COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 93-1326.

United States Court of Appeals,
Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: June 21, 1993.
Decided: August 5, 1993.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (CA-92-153-5-BO)

Arthur Wadley, Appellant Pro Se.

N. Leo Daughtry, Luther Donald Starling, Jr., Daughtry, Woodard & Lawrence, Smithfield, North Carolina, for Appellee.

E.D.N.C.

AFFIRMED.

Before WILKINSON and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

1

Arthur Wadley appeals from the district court's order granting Defendant's motion for summary judgment in his employment discrimination action. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Wadley v. J. R. Tobacco Company, No. CA-92-153-5-BO (E.D.N.C. Feb. 17, 1993). 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.

AFFIRMED