Filed: Feb. 25, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-2126 MARIA S. REMINGTON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. JOSEPH V. DIPIERRO, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (5:17-cv-00374-BR) Submitted: February 21, 2019 Decided: February 25, 2019 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and AGEE and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Maria S. Rem
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-2126 MARIA S. REMINGTON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. JOSEPH V. DIPIERRO, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (5:17-cv-00374-BR) Submitted: February 21, 2019 Decided: February 25, 2019 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and AGEE and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Maria S. Remi..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 18-2126
MARIA S. REMINGTON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
JOSEPH V. DIPIERRO,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (5:17-cv-00374-BR)
Submitted: February 21, 2019 Decided: February 25, 2019
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and AGEE and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Maria S. Remington, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Maria S. Remington appeals the district court’s order dismissing her 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 (2012) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012). We have reviewed the
record and find no meritorious issue for review. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons
stated by the district court. Remington v. Dipierro, No. 5:17-cv-00374-BR (E.D.N.C.
July 31, 2018). 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