Field Auto City, Inc. v. General Motors Corp. , 254 F. App'x 167 ( 2007 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-1388
FIELD AUTO CITY, INCORPORATED,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION; GENERAL MOTORS
ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, Senior
District Judge. (1:06-cv-01174-TSE)
Submitted: November 2, 2007 Decided: November 15, 2007
Before MICHAEL and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael P. Fortkort, MICHAEL P. FORTKORT PC, Oak Hill, Virginia,
for Appellant. David G. Barger, Kathleen J. Holmes, WILLIAMS
MULLEN, McLean, Virginia; Monroe Kelly III, Joseph R. Mayes,
WILLIAMS MULLEN, Virginia Beach, Virginia; Sheila L. Shadmand,
JONES DAY, Washington, D.C.; Jeffrey J. Jones, T. Todd Kennard,
JONES DAY, Columbus, Ohio, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Field Auto City, Inc. appeals the district court’s orders
granting Defendants’ motion to dismiss its claims brought pursuant
to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000), and the Automobile Dealer’s Day in
Court Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1221-1225 (2000), and denying its motion to
amend the complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm substantially for the
reasons stated by the district court. Field Auto City, Inc. v.
Gen. Motors Corp., No. 1:06-cv-01174-TSE (E.D. Va. Feb. 23, 2007;
Mar. 22, 2007). We deny Defendants’ motion to strike Field Auto’s
reply brief. 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
- 2 -