Charles W. ANDERSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES PATENT OFFICE; J & E Associates, Incorporated; Bernard Berger; Rebecca Barnes; Charles E. Smith Management, Incorporated; United States of America, Defendants-Appellees, and William C. Daley, Secretary for United States Department of Commerce; Todd Dickerson, Commissioner, United States Patent Office; Nicholas Godici, Deputy Commissioner of United States Patent Office; William Jenkins; Thomas Magnetti, Esquire, United States Department of Commerce; Laura Guillespie, Esquire, United States Department of Commerce; Catherine Kessmeir, Esquire, United States Patent Office; Sydney Rose, Personnel, United States Patent Office; Lavon Proctor, Human Resources, United States PTO; Calib J.R. Garland, Security, United States PTO; John J. Love, Director Group, United States PTO; Wynn Coggins, United States Patent Office; Jennifer Sadula, United States Patent Office; Ronald Stright, United States Patent Office; Sharon Finkel, United States Patent Office; William Noggle, United States PTO; Kelly O'Hara, United States Patent Office; Cheryl Huseman, United States PTO; Carey O'Connor, United States PTO; Chris Rodriguez, United States PTO; Corrine McDermott, United States PTO; Kimberly Asher, United States PTO, Defendants. Charles W. Anderson, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. United States Patent Office; J & E Associates, Incorporated; Bernard Berger; Rebecca Barnes; Charles E. Smith Management, Incorporated; United States of America, Defendants-Appellees, and William C. Daley, Secretary for United States Department of Commerce; Todd Dickerson, Commissioner, United States Patent Office; Nicholas Godici, Deputy Commissioner of United States Patent Office; William Jenkins; Thomas Magnetti, Esquire, United States Department of Commerce; Laura Guillespie, Esquire, United States Department of Commerce; Catherine Kessmeir, Esquire, United States Patent Office; Sydney Rose, Personnel, United States Patent Office; Lavon Proctor, Human Resources, United States PTO; Calib J.R. Garland, Security, United States PTO; John J. Love, Director Group, United States PTO; Wynn Coggins, United States Patent Office; Jennifer Sadula, United States Patent Office; Ronald Stright, United States Patent Office; Sharon Finkel, United States Patent Office; William Noggle, United States PTO; Kelly O'Hara, United States Patent Office; Cheryl Huseman, United States PTO; Carey O'Connor, United States PTO; Chris Rodriguez, United States PTO; Corrine McDermott, United States PTO; Kimberly Asher, United States PTO, Defendants, 24 F. App'x 103

PER CURIAM. Charles W. Anderson appeals the district court’s orders granting Defendants’ motions to dismiss and motions for

summary judgment. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Anderson v. Daley, No. CA-00-109-A (E.D. Va. Apr. 12, 2000; Apr. 26, 2000; May 24, 2000; June 13, 2000; June 27, 2000). 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. Pursuant to Rules 58 and 79(

a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date that the judgment or order was entered on the docket sheet that we take as the effective date of the district court’s orders. See Wilson v. Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir.1986).