Paul Yongo v. John McHugh

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 5:10-cv-00220-F. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999205361]. Mailed to: Paul Yongo. [13-1792]

Download PDF
Appeal: 13-1792 Doc: 10 Filed: 10/01/2013 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-1792 PAUL COLLINS YONGO, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. THE HONORABLE JOHN MCHUGH, in his official capacity as Secretary of the Army; DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, Financial Management Service; J. HORNE, in his official capacity as a military pay technician; DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendants - Appellees, and DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY; THE HONORABLE ROBERT GATES; DEFENSE ACCOUNTING & FINANCIAL SERVICES, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (5:10-cv-00220-F) Submitted: September 24, 2013 Decided: Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. October 1, 2013 Appeal: 13-1792 Doc: 10 Filed: 10/01/2013 Pg: 2 of 3 Paul Collins Yongo, Appellant Pro Se. Matthew Fesak, Assistant United States Attorney, Seth Morgan Wood, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 Appeal: 13-1792 Doc: 10 Filed: 10/01/2013 Pg: 3 of 3 PER CURIAM: Paul Collins Yongo appeals the district court’s order dismissing his civil complaint. find no reversible error. We have reviewed the record and Accordingly, reasons stated by the district court. we affirm for the See Yongo v. McHugh, No. 5:10-cv-00220-F (E.D.N.C. May 23, 2013). 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 3

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?