The Law Lion Logo - AI-powered legal writing assistantThe Law Lion
Home
Features
Pricing
Services
AboutBlogCasesContact
Login
Ask Law Lion AI
  1. Home
  2. >Cases
  3. >Whitmore v. Reno
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Whitmore v. Reno

99-62020 citations

Table of Contents

  • Opinions
  • Opinions
  • UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-6202...

Table of Contents

  • Opinions
  • Opinions
  • UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-6202...

No summary available for this case.

Opinions

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-6202

TIMOTHY B. WHITMORE, 529 11 4350, US Coast Guard Reserves,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

JANET RENO, as Attorney General of the United States; RODNEY SLATER, as Secretary for the Department of Transportation; THE OFFICE FOR THE INSPECTOR GENERAL, Department of Transportation; ROBERT E. KRAMEK, Admiral, as Commandant of the Coast Guard; REAR ADMIRAL BARRETT, as Commander of the Maintenance and Logistics Command Atlantic; THOMAS B. TAYLOR, Captain, as Commander of the Coast Guard Personnel Command; UNITED STATES ATTORNEY FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA, Custodial Respondent,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry C. Morgan, Jr., District Judge. (CA-98-101-2)

Submitted: May 25, 1999 Decided: September 13, 1999

Before NIEMEYER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Timothy B. Whitmore, Appellant Pro Se. Susan Lynn Watt, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Timothy B. Whitmore appeals the district court’s order

granting Defendant’s motion to dismiss his petition filed under 28

U.S.C. § 2241 (1994). We have reviewed the record and the district

court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we

affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Whitmore v.

United States, No. CA-98-101-2 (E.D. Va. Jan. 29, 1999). We dis-

pense 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

The Law Lion logoThe Law Lion.

The Law Lion is the only platform combining AI legal writing grounded in real case law with an expert human writing service — serving attorneys, paralegals, and everyday people nationwide.

info@thelawlion.com
Mon–Fri 9am–6pm EST · Rush available
Serving Clients Nationwide

AI Tool

  • → AI Legal Writing Tool
  • → AI Document Drafting
  • → Motion Drafting
  • → Contract Drafting
  • → Legal Research
  • → Case Law Search
  • → Citation Generator
  • → Document Review
  • → Contract Review
  • → For Lawyers

Writing Service

  • → Eviction Defense
  • → Court Documents
  • → Custody & Family
  • → Divorce Documents
  • → Debt & Collections
  • → All Writing Services

Top Guides

  • → Eviction Response Guide
  • → Best AI Legal Tools 2026
  • → Debt Validation Letter Guide

Company

  • → About The Law Lion
  • → Client Results
  • → Transparent Pricing
  • → Legal Guides & Blog
  • → Contact & Free Consult
  • → Affiliate Program

Top Services

  • → Eviction Notice Response
  • → Debt Validation Letter
  • → Court Summons Response
© 2026 The Law Lion LLC · AI Legal Writing & Expert Document Service
Privacy PolicyTerms of ServiceSitemap