Opinion · United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
KUMVACHIRAPITAG v. MICROSOFT CORP., 383 Fed.Appx. 4 (D.C. Cir. 2010)
Sukit N. KUMVACHIRAPITAG, Appellant v. MICROSOFT Corp., andSeventy-nine or more Corps., et al., Appellees., 383 F. App'x 4 (D.C. Cir. 2010)
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
- Date
- 2010-06-23
- Topic
- general
KUMVACHIRAPITAG v. MICROSOFT CORP., 383 Fed.Appx. 4 (D.C. Cir. 2010) Sukit N. KUMVACHIRAPITAG, Appellant v. MICROSOFT CORPORATION, andSeventy-nine or more Corporations, et al., Appellees.
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed KUMVACHIRAPITAG v. MICROSOFT CORP., 383 Fed.Appx. 4 (D.C. Cir. 2010). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
KUMVACHIRAPITAG v. MICROSOFT CORP.,383 Fed.Appx. 4(D.C. Cir. 2010)
Sukit N. KUMVACHIRAPITAG, Appellant v. MICROSOFT CORPORATION, and
Seventy-nine or more Corporations, et al., Appellees.
No. 10-7048.
United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.
June 23, 2010.
Rehearing Denied August 30, 2010.
On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.
Sukit N. Kumvachirapitag, Newton Grove, NC, pro se.
BEFORE: SENTELLE, Chief Judge, and TATEL and GRIFFITH, Circuit Judges.
JUDGMENT
This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the brief and appendix filed by the appellant.SeeFed.R.App.P.34(a)(2); D.C. Cir. Rule 340'). It isORDERED AND ADJUDGEDthat the district court's order filed April 7, 2010, be affirmed. The district court correctly dismissed the action without prejudice on the ground that appellant had not provided proof the defendants were served with a summons and a copy of the complaint or responded to the court's order with an explanation for his failure to do so.SeeFed.R.Civ.P.4— Summons. Because the complaint had not been served, the district court properly denied appellant's motions for preliminary relief, including the motions for appointment of counsel and motions to appear in person for mediation.
Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc.SeeFed.R.App.P.41(b); D.C. Cir. Rule 41.
Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc.SeeFed.R.App.P.41(b); D.C. Cir. Rule 41.
- [EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] ↩