Dominic Bianchi v. Anthony Brown, 21-1255

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. James K. Bredar, Chief District Judge. (1:20-cv-03495-JKB)

Submitted: September 14, 2021

Decided: September 17, 2021

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Raymond M. DiGuiseppe, THE DIGUISEPPE LAW FIRM, P.C., Southport, North Carolina; Adam Kraut, FIREARMS POLICY COALTION, Sacramento, California; David H. Thompson, Peter A. Patterson, Tiernan B. Kane, COOPER & KIRK, PLLC, Washington, D.C., for Appellants. Brian E. Frosh, Attorney General of Maryland, Robert A. Scott, Assistant Attorney General, Ryan R. Dietrich, Assistant Attorney General, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Plaintiffs appeal the district court‘s order dismissing their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. In this action, Plaintiffs sought to challenge Maryland‘s Firearm Safety Act‘s ban on assault weapons as violative of the Second Amendment. As Plaintiffs concede, however, their argument is squarely foreclosed by this court‘s decision in Kolbe v. Hogan, 849 F.3d 114 (4th Cir. 2017) (en banc). “As a panel, we are not authorized to reconsider an en banc holding.” Joseph v. Angelone, 184 F.3d 320, 325 (4th Cir. 1999). Accordingly, we affirm the district court‘s order. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

Case Details

Case Name: Dominic Bianchi v. Anthony Brown

Court Name: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Date Published: Aug 6, 2024

Citation: 21-1255

Docket Number: 21-1255

Court Abbreviation: 4th Cir.