
    CHRISTIAN BROADCASTING NETWORK, INCORPORATED; M.G. Pat Robertson, Plaintiffs—Appellees, v. Phillip BUSCH, Defendant—Appellant. Christian Broadcasting Network, Incorporated; M.G. Pat Robertson, Plaintiffs—Appellees, v. Phillip Busch, Defendant—Appellant.
    Nos. 07-1392, 07-1393.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Nov. 6, 2007.
    Decided: Nov. 21, 2007.
    Phillip Busch, Appellant Pro Se. Glen Alton Huff, Dorinda Sue Parkola, Huff, Poole & Mahoney, P.C., Virginia Beach, Virginia, for Appellees.
    Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
   PER CURIAM:

These consolidated appeals arise out of a dispute between Phillip Busch, a Texas resident, and M.G. Pat Robertson and the Christian Broadcasting Network, Inc. (“CBN”), both residents of Virginia, arising from the use of Busch’s weight loss “before” and “after” photographs on certain episodes of CBN’s television program The 700 Club after Busch gave CBN the permission to do so. Busch filed a complaint against Robertson and CBN alleging intentional infliction of emotional distress, misappropriation of image, fraud, unjust enrichment, and civil conspiracy. CBN and Robertson filed a declaratory judgment action. The actions were consolidated, and the district court permitted CBN and Robertson to voluntarily dismiss the declaratory judgment action on the condition that they pay Busch’s attorney’s fees and costs with respect to that action.

The district court granted summary judgment in favor of Robertson and CBN on Busch’s claims, and awarded Busch $9340.73 in attorney’s fees and costs associated with defending himself against CBN and Robertson’s declaratory judgment action. Busch timely appealed, challenging the district court’s denial of relief on his claims against CBN and Robertson, and contending the district court unfairly declined to award all of his claimed attorney’s fees as to the declaratory judgment action. He also raises alleged errors in the discovery process and challenges the district court’s denial of his requests to stay or continue the proceedings. Finding no error, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Christian Broadcasting Network, Inc. v. Busch, No. 2:05-cv-00558-RAJ, 2007 WL 1112648 (E.D.Va. Apr. 12, 2007).

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.  