
    Afaf KANAZEH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MICROSOFT CORPORATION; Prodigy Communication Corporation; American Online; Time Warner, Incorporated; Lockheed Martin Corporation; Michael K. Mann, Defendants-Appellees. Afaf Kanazeh, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Microsoft Corporation; Prodigy Communication Corporation; American Online; Time Warner, Incorporated; Lockheed Martin Corporation; Michael K. Mann, Defendants-Appellees.
    Nos. 03-1023, 03-1205.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted June 6, 2003.
    Decided June 26, 2003.
    Afaf Kanazeh, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Wayne Robinson, VEnable, Baetjer & Howard, Vienna, Virginia; Jeffrey Hamilton Geiger, Sands, Anderson, Marks & Miller, Richmond, Virginia; Laura Ann Heyman, America Online, Incorporated, Dulles, Virginia; Michelle Loser Schaefer, Piper Rudnick, L.L.P., Reston, Virginia, for Appellees.
    Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   PER CURIAM.

In these consolidated appeals, Afaf Kanazeh appeals three district court orders dismissing her complaint and ending the litigation. On April 16, 2003, by order to cause, Kanazeh was ordered to show why she should not be sanctioned for filing frivolous appeals and enjoined from filing further actions. Kanazeh filed a response claiming her appeals were not frivolous. After reviewing the appeals we disagree. Kanazeh has filed numerous frivolous appeals in this court and in so doing has abused the judicial process. Kanazeh has also been sanctioned for frivolous litigation in state court and in the district court. In lieu of particularized fees and costs and in light of Kanazeh’s utter disregard for the limited resources of this court, we order her to pay sanctions in the amount of $500 payable to the clerk of the court, as we have done in similar cases. See In re Vincent, 105 F.3d 943 (4th Cir.1997). In addition, we enjoin Kanazeh from filing any further appeals in this court until (1) the sanctions are fully paid, and (2) the district court certifies the appeal is not frivolous.

We have reviewed the record and the district court orders and dismiss Kanazeh’s appeals as frivolous. Appellee Prodigy Communications Corporation has filed a motion for sanctions which we deny as moot. In both appeals, Kanazeh has filed a motion for judgment and in No. 03-1205, Kanazeh has filed a motion for oral argument. We deny the motions. 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.

DISMISSED.  