Filed: Aug. 24, 2020
Latest Update: Sep. 22, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 20-1326 BRYAN TAGGART, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MARK ESPER, Secretary of Defense, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Anthony John Trenga, District Judge. (1:19-cv-01150-AJT-IDD) Submitted: August 20, 2020 Decided: August 24, 2020 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, WYNN, and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Br
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 20-1326 BRYAN TAGGART, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MARK ESPER, Secretary of Defense, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Anthony John Trenga, District Judge. (1:19-cv-01150-AJT-IDD) Submitted: August 20, 2020 Decided: August 24, 2020 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, WYNN, and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bry..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 20-1326 BRYAN TAGGART, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MARK ESPER, Secretary of Defense, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Anthony John Trenga, District Judge. (1:19-cv-01150-AJT-IDD) Submitted: August 20, 2020 Decided: August 24, 2020 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, WYNN, and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bryan Taggart, Appellant Pro Se. Matthew James Mezger, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Bryan Taggart appeals the district court’s order dismissing for lack of subject matter jurisdiction his amended civil action in which Taggart brought claims related to various medical conditions that developed during the course of his federal employment. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error in the district court’s jurisdictional analysis. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Taggart v. Esper, No. 1:19-cv-01150-AJT-IDD (E.D. Va. Feb. 18, 2020). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2