Richard Spencer appeals from the district court’s judgment entered after a jury verdict following trial in the civil action brought against him for conspiracy to commit racially motivated violence, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3); failure to prevent the conspiracy to commit racially motivated violence from taking place, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1986; Virginia state civil conspiracy; and racial, religious, or ethnic harassment, in violation of Va. Code Ann.

Spencer challenges the district court’s ruling upholding the magistrate judge’s order striking his summary judgment motion as untimely filed.

Because Spencer has not established reversible error in the district court’s ruling that a venue transfer was not permitted by § 1404(a) or § 1404(b), we need not reach Spencer’s arguments directed at this alternative conclusion.

First, under Rule 50(a), the party challenges “the sufficiency of the evidence before a case is submitted to the jury.” Id. Rule 50(a) provides that a motion for judgment as a matter of law made before the case is submitted to the jury “must specify the judgment sought and the law and facts that entitle the movant to the judgment.” Fed. R. Civ.

Spencer moved under Rule 50(a) for judgment as a matter of law in his favor before the case was submitted to the jury on the basis that the evidence was insufficient to show he conspired with anyone or sought to harm any of the Plaintiffs and because comments he made were constitutionally protected.