Filed: Sep. 26, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-1597 MIA C. ALFORD, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CHUCK ROSENBERG, Director of DEA; BETH COBERT, Director of OPM; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (7:16-cv-00376-D) Submitted: September 24, 2019 Decided: September 26, 2019 Before WYNN and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-1597 MIA C. ALFORD, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CHUCK ROSENBERG, Director of DEA; BETH COBERT, Director of OPM; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (7:16-cv-00376-D) Submitted: September 24, 2019 Decided: September 26, 2019 Before WYNN and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER,..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-1597 MIA C. ALFORD, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CHUCK ROSENBERG, Director of DEA; BETH COBERT, Director of OPM; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (7:16-cv-00376-D) Submitted: September 24, 2019 Decided: September 26, 2019 Before WYNN and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Mia C. Alford, Appellant Pro Se. Joshua Bryan Royster, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Mia C. Alford appeals the district court’s order granting Defendants’ motion for summary judgment 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. Alford v. Rosenberg, No. 7:16-cv-00376-D (E.D.N.C. May 2, 2019). 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
