Filed: Nov. 15, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-2048 CORINE BARNES, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-99- 2501) Submitted: November 9, 2000 Decided: November 15, 2000 Before WILKINS, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Corine Barnes, Ap
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-2048 CORINE BARNES, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-99- 2501) Submitted: November 9, 2000 Decided: November 15, 2000 Before WILKINS, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Corine Barnes, App..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-2048
CORINE BARNES,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN
SERVICES,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-99-
2501)
Submitted: November 9, 2000 Decided: November 15, 2000
Before WILKINS, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Corine Barnes, Appellant Pro Se. Larry David Adams, Assistant
United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Corine Barnes appeals the district court’s order dismissing
her civil action alleging employment discrimination. We have re-
viewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the
district court. See Barnes v. Secretary, HHS, No. CA-99-2501 (D.
Md. July 17, 2000).* We dispense with oral argument because the
facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the mate-
rials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED
*
Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on
July 14, 2000, the district court’s records show that it was
entered on the docket sheet on July 17, 2000. Pursuant to Rules 58
and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date
that the order was entered on the docket sheet that we take as the
effective date of the district court’s decision. See Wilson v.
Murray,
806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986).
2