Pamela Jones v. US

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 4:09-cv-00129-MSD-DEM. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999324087]. Mailed to: P. Jones. [13-2441]

Download PDF
Appeal: 13-2441 Doc: 11 Filed: 03/27/2014 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-2441 PAMELA JONES, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Newport News. Mark S. Davis, District Judge. (4:09-cv-00129-MSD-DEM) Submitted: March 25, 2014 Decided: March 27, 2014 Before GREGORY, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Pamela M. Jones, Assistant United Appellee. Appellant Pro Se. Mark States Attorney, Norfolk, Anthony Exley, Virginia, for Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 13-2441 Doc: 11 Filed: 03/27/2014 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Pamela M. Jones appeals the district court’s order granting the Government’s motion to dismiss her complaint filed under the Federal Tort Claims §§ 1346(b), 2671-2680 (2012). Jones sought to relitigate Act (“FTCA”), 28 U.S.C. The district court concluded that a ruling issued by a different district court in an earlier FTCA proceeding, and found this proceeding barred by applicable statutes the of doctrine of limitations. res judicata The court and also the denied Jones’ motion to amend the complaint and her Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion seeking reconsideration of the prior proceeding. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Jones v. United States, No. 4:09-cv-00129-MSD-DEM (E.D. Va. Sept. 26, 2013). facts and materials legal before We dispense with oral argument because the 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?