The opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 20-1866
AARON LUCIANI, Independent Candidate for U.S. House of Representatives,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
VIRGINIA STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS; ROBERT H. BRINK, Chairman of
the State Board of Elections, in his official capacity; JOHN O’BANNON, Vice-
chairman of the State Board of Elections, in his official capacity; JAMILAH D.
LECRUISE, Secretary of the State Board of Elections, in her official capacity;
CHRISTOPHER PIPER, Commissioner of the State Board of Elections, in his
official capacity; JESSICA BOWMAN, Deputy Commissioner of the State Board of
Elections, in her official capacity,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at
Roanoke. Glen E. Conrad, Senior District Judge. (7:20-cv-00401-GEC)
Submitted: August 21, 2020 Decided: August 26, 2020
Before KING, WYNN, and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Aaron Luciani, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Aaron Luciani is seeking to run for the United States House of Representatives for
Virginia’s Sixth Congressional District as an independent candidate. He appeals the
district court’s order denying his motion to alter or amend its prior order granting him an
extension to August 1, 2020, to obtain the necessary qualified signatures in order to be
placed on the November ballot. Luciani sought an order further extending the deadline to
August 21, 2020.
We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinions and we find no abuse
of discretion. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Luciani
v. Va. State Bd. of Elections, No. 7:20-cv-00401-GEC (W.D. Va. Aug. 7, 2020). In light
of this disposition, we deny Luciani’s motion for a stay pending appeal and we deny as
moot his motion to expedite a decision in this matter. 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
2