Filed: May 04, 2011
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-6230 MARY CARTER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MR. COOPER, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (5:10-ct-03133-D) Submitted: April 28, 2011 Decided: May 4, 2011 Before DAVIS, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Mary Carter, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-6230 MARY CARTER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MR. COOPER, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (5:10-ct-03133-D) Submitted: April 28, 2011 Decided: May 4, 2011 Before DAVIS, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Mary Carter, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are ..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-6230
MARY CARTER,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
MR. COOPER,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III,
District Judge. (5:10-ct-03133-D)
Submitted: April 28, 2011 Decided: May 4, 2011
Before DAVIS, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Mary Carter, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Mary Carter appeals the district court’s order
dismissing her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint without
prejudice under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2006). We have reviewed
the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm
for the reasons stated by the district court. Carter v. Cooper,
No. 5:10-ct-03133-D (E.D.N.C. Feb. 1, 2011). 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
2