Filed: Nov. 27, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-1855 In re: CATHERINE DENISE RANDOLPH, Appellant. No. 17-2066 In re: CATHERINE DENISE RANDOLPH, Appellant. Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge; Ellen L. Hollander, District Judge. (1:15-mc-00369) Submitted: November 21, 2017 Decided: November 27, 2017 Before WYNN and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Appeals d
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-1855 In re: CATHERINE DENISE RANDOLPH, Appellant. No. 17-2066 In re: CATHERINE DENISE RANDOLPH, Appellant. Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge; Ellen L. Hollander, District Judge. (1:15-mc-00369) Submitted: November 21, 2017 Decided: November 27, 2017 Before WYNN and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Appeals di..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-1855 In re: CATHERINE DENISE RANDOLPH, Appellant. No. 17-2066 In re: CATHERINE DENISE RANDOLPH, Appellant. Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge; Ellen L. Hollander, District Judge. (1:15-mc-00369) Submitted: November 21, 2017 Decided: November 27, 2017 Before WYNN and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Appeals dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Catherine Denise Randolph, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: In these consolidated appeals, Catherine Denise Randolph appeals the district court’s decisions returning her complaints because they were not in compliance with the prefiling injunction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeals. 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. DISMISSED 3
