Filed: Oct. 19, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-1979 ROSA J. COLEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Greenville. Malcolm J. Howard, Dis- trict Judge. (CA-99-152-4-1H) Submitted: October 12, 2000 Decided: October 19, 2000 Before WILLIAMS and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per cur
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-1979 ROSA J. COLEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Greenville. Malcolm J. Howard, Dis- trict Judge. (CA-99-152-4-1H) Submitted: October 12, 2000 Decided: October 19, 2000 Before WILLIAMS and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curi..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-1979 ROSA J. COLEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Greenville. Malcolm J. Howard, Dis- trict Judge. (CA-99-152-4-1H) Submitted: October 12, 2000 Decided: October 19, 2000 Before WILLIAMS and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Rosa J. Coley, Appellant Pro Se. Barbara Dickerson Kocher, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Rosa J. Coley appeals the district court’s order dismissing her civil complaint for failure to prosecute. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Coley v. Social Security Admin., CA-99-152-4-1H (E.D.N.C. June 2, 2000). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the ma- terials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2
