Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Reina Chavez-Romero v. U.S. Dep't of Education, 12-2508 (2013)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 12-2508 Visitors: 4
Filed: Apr. 22, 2013
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-2508 REINA CHAVEZ-ROMERO, a/k/a Reina M. Chavez-Romero, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, Federal Offset Unit, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Mary G. Lewis, District Judge. (6:11-cv-01639-MGL) Submitted: April 18, 2013 Decided: April 22, 2013 Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-2508 REINA CHAVEZ-ROMERO, a/k/a Reina M. Chavez-Romero, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, Federal Offset Unit, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Mary G. Lewis, District Judge. (6:11-cv-01639-MGL) Submitted: April 18, 2013 Decided: April 22, 2013 Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Reina Chavez-Romero, Appellant Pro Se. Barbara Murcier Bowens, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Reina Chavez-Romero appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and granting summary judgment in favor of the defendant. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Chavez-Romero v. U.S. Department of Education, No. 6:11-cv-01639-MGL (D.S.C. filed Nov. 28 & entered Nov. 29, 2012). We deny the motion to stay as moot. We deny the motion for a copy of the record on appeal. 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
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer