Filed: Mar. 27, 2013
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-1047 EMMANUELA OBI, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. VIRGINIA STATE UNIVERSITY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. John A. Gibney, Jr., District Judge. (3:12-cv-00825-JAG) Submitted: February 21, 2013 Decided: March 27, 2013 Before AGEE and DAVIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Emmanue
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-1047 EMMANUELA OBI, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. VIRGINIA STATE UNIVERSITY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. John A. Gibney, Jr., District Judge. (3:12-cv-00825-JAG) Submitted: February 21, 2013 Decided: March 27, 2013 Before AGEE and DAVIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Emmanuel..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-1047
EMMANUELA OBI,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
VIRGINIA STATE UNIVERSITY,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. John A. Gibney, Jr.,
District Judge. (3:12-cv-00825-JAG)
Submitted: February 21, 2013 Decided: March 27, 2013
Before AGEE and DAVIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Emmanuela Obi, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Emmanuela Obi appeals the district court’s order
dismissing Obi’s civil action without prejudice. * We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,
we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Obi v.
Virginia State Univ., No. 3:12-cv-00825-JAG (E.D. Va. Jan. 2,
2013). 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
*
Generally, orders dismissing complaints without prejudice
are interlocutory and not appealable. Domino Sugar Corp. v.
Sugar Workers Local Union 392,
10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir.
1993). However, orders dismissing actions or cases in their
entirety without prejudice generally are appealable. Chao v.
Rivendell Woods, Inc.,
415 F.3d 342, 345 (4th Cir. 2005). We
find that the district court’s order is an appealable order
because the action was dismissed in its entirety and the
district court’s order indicates that “amendment of [Obi’s]
complaint would not permit [her] to continue the litigation in
the district court.” Id.
2