ASSEM A. ABULKHAIR v. LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-3408-10T1

ASSEM A. ABULKHAIR,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE

COMPANY,

Defendant-Respondent.

________________________________________________________________

November 10, 2011

Argued November 1, 2011 - Decided

Before Judges Carchman and Fisher.

On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Essex County, Docket No. L-6482-07.

Assem A. Abulkhair, appellant, argued the cause pro se.

John A. Fearns argued the cause for respondent (Lamb, Kretzer, Reinman & Roselle, attorneys; Mr. Fearns, on the brief).

PER CURIAM

In this continuing litigation that began in 2003 and has been adjudicated or reviewed by the Law Division, this court, and the Supreme Court of New Jersey, as well as the United States District Court, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals and the United States Supreme Court, plaintiff Assem A. Abulkhair now seeks review of an order of the Law Division granting summary judgment and dismissing his latest complaint. We affirm.

The relevant background of these complaints and appeals filed by plaintiff are set forth in the original Law Division orders of August 6, 2004, April 15, 2005, and April 3, 2009, entered in the matter of Abulkhair v. Banks, L-4711-01; our order of May 5, 2006, A-5277-04; the denial of the petition for certification, 188 N.J. 346 (2006); and the denial of the petition for certiorari, 549 U.S. 1226, 127 S. Ct. 1294, 167 L. Ed. 2d 110 (2007), as well as the Law Division order of February 7, 2011, dismissing plaintiff's complaint in the present action and our unpublished opinion in Abulkhair v. Liberty Mutual Insurance, No. A-1299-06 (App. Div. Feb. 1, 2008), dismissing plaintiff's Bergen County1 complaint.

We perceive of no need to reiterate all of the facts except to note that plaintiff's various complaints and appeals have been fully aired and adjudicated. On this appeal, plaintiff asserts that the judge erred and abused his discretion by failing to allow discovery and further erred granting summary judgment.

We have carefully reviewed the record, and we conclude that plaintiff's claims are without merit. R. 2:11-3(e)(1)(E).

1 Although the original cause of action was filed in Passaic, plaintiff has filed related complaints in the Bergen, Union and Essex vicinages.