Filed: Apr. 30, 2010
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-1388 DEBRA PLETZ, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. LEON E. PANETTA, Director of Central Intelligence Agency, Defendant – Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:08-cv-00539-CMH-TCB) Submitted: March 30, 2010 Decided: April 30, 2010 Before KING, SHEDD, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-1388 DEBRA PLETZ, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. LEON E. PANETTA, Director of Central Intelligence Agency, Defendant – Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:08-cv-00539-CMH-TCB) Submitted: March 30, 2010 Decided: April 30, 2010 Before KING, SHEDD, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-1388 DEBRA PLETZ, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. LEON E. PANETTA, Director of Central Intelligence Agency, Defendant – Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:08-cv-00539-CMH-TCB) Submitted: March 30, 2010 Decided: April 30, 2010 Before KING, SHEDD, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Debra Pletz, Appellant Pro Se. Monika L. Moore, Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Debra Pletz appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to the Defendant in her civil action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Pletz v. Hayden, No. 1:08-cv-00539-CMH-TCB (E.D. Va. filed Feb. 4, 2009; entered Feb. 5, 2009). 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
