James Reedom v. Carolyn Colvin

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999256358-2] Originating case number: 1:13-cv-02305-RDB Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999326399]. Mailed to: James Reedom. [13-2423]

Download PDF
Appeal: 13-2423 Doc: 9 Filed: 03/31/2014 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-2423 JAMES PATRICK REEDOM, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Administration, Acting Commissioner Social Security Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (1:13-cv-02305-RDB) Submitted: March 27, 2014 Before MOTZ, Circuit Circuit Judges. Judge, Decided: March 31, 2014 and HAMILTON and DAVIS, Senior Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James Patrick Reedom, Appellant Pro Se. Alex Gordon, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland; Craig Ormson, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 13-2423 Doc: 9 Filed: 03/31/2014 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: James Patrick Reedom appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his civil complaint without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and find Accordingly, no reversible error. we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Reedom v. Colvin, No. 1:13-cv-02305-RDB (D. Md. Nov. 1, 2013). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and materials legal before contentions are adequately this and argument court presented would not in the aid the 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?