Deane v. Marshalls, Inc

Filing 920070220

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-1793

ALICE M. DEANE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MARSHALLS, INCORPORATED, Defendant - Appellee.

No. 06-2039

ALICE M. DEANE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MARSHALLS, INCORPORATED, Defendant - Appellee.

No. 06-2174

ALICE M. DEANE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus

MARSHALLS, INCORPORATED, Defendant - Appellee.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, Senior District Judge. (7:06-mc-00031-jct)

Submitted:

January 31, 2007

Decided:

February 20, 2007

Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Alice M. Deane, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

- 2 -

PER CURIAM: In these consolidated appeals, Alice M. Deane appeals the district court's order denying leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissing her civil action* and the order denying her motion filed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). With regard to Deane's appeal

of the order denying her Rule 60(b) motion, we find that Deane has waived appellate review of that order by failing to challenge the district court's reasoning in her informal appellate brief.

Turning to the district court's order dismissing Deane's civil action, we have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we grant Deane leave to proceed in forma pauperis and affirm the order dismissing her civil action but modify the

dismissal to be without prejudice.

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

We have jurisdiction to review this order because the district court properly granted an extension of time to appeal. - 3 -

*