Filed: Jan. 24, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-1889 XIAO-YING YU, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. ROBERT R. NEALL, Maryland Department of Health Secretary (formerly Dennis Schrader); DAVID BRINKLEY, Maryland Department of Budget and Management Secretary, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. James K. Bredar, Chief District Judge. (1:17-cv-03260-JKB) Submitted: January 22, 2019 Decided: January 24, 2019
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-1889 XIAO-YING YU, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. ROBERT R. NEALL, Maryland Department of Health Secretary (formerly Dennis Schrader); DAVID BRINKLEY, Maryland Department of Budget and Management Secretary, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. James K. Bredar, Chief District Judge. (1:17-cv-03260-JKB) Submitted: January 22, 2019 Decided: January 24, 2019 ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-1889 XIAO-YING YU, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. ROBERT R. NEALL, Maryland Department of Health Secretary (formerly Dennis Schrader); DAVID BRINKLEY, Maryland Department of Budget and Management Secretary, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. James K. Bredar, Chief District Judge. (1:17-cv-03260-JKB) Submitted: January 22, 2019 Decided: January 24, 2019 Before MOTZ, KEENAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Xiao-Ying Yu, Appellant Pro Se. James Nelson Lewis, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Xiao-Ying Yu appeals the district court’s order dismissing her civil action that alleged claims of workplace discrimination. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Yu v. Neall, No. 1:17-cv-03260-JKB (D. Md. June 26, 2018). We deny as moot Yu’s “Motion for Concerns of the Docket Records.” 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