Jennifer McGowan v. ABM Janitorial Services, North
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 2:10-cv-00388-MSD-DEM Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998781195]. Mailed to: Jennifer M. McGowan. [11-1840]
Appeal: 11-1840
Document: 15
Date Filed: 02/06/2012
Page: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-1840
JENNIFER M. MCGOWAN,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
ABM JANITORIAL SERVICES, NORTHEAST, INC.; URSULA BASKETT,
Defendants – Appellees,
and
ABM JANITORIAL SERVICES - NORTH CENTRAL, INC.; ABM
JANITORIAL SERVICES - MID-ATLANTIC, INC.,
Defendants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk.
Mark S. Davis, District
Judge. (2:10-cv-00388-MSD-DEM)
Submitted:
January 31, 2012
Decided:
February 6, 2012
Before DUNCAN, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jennifer M. McGowan, Appellant Pro Se. Michael R. Ward, MORRIS
& MORRIS, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 11-1840
Document: 15
Date Filed: 02/06/2012
Page: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
In
this
personal
injury
action,
removed
to
federal
court under the court’s diversity jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1332
(2006), Jennifer M. McGowan appeals the district court's order
granting Defendants’ Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) motion to dismiss
for lack of jurisdiction.
Having reviewed the district court’s
ruling de novo, Taylor v. Kellogg Brown & Root Servs., Inc., 658
F.3d 402, 408 (4th Cir. 2011),
by the district court.
we affirm for the reasons stated
McGowan v. ABM Janitorial Servs., No.
2:10-cv-00388-MSD-DEM (E.D. Va. filed June 29 & entered June 30,
2011).
legal
before
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
contentions
the
court
are
adequately
and
argument
presented
would
not
in
aid
the
the
materials
decisional
process.
AFFIRMED
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?