Sharon Falzone v. S. John

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 3:14-cv-00389-REP-MHL Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999506077]. Mailed to: Falzone. [14-7280]

Appeal: 14-7280

Doc: 10

Filed: 01/07/2015

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7280

SHARON FALZONE,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
S. JOHNS, Dr., Physician, Virginia Correctional Center for
Women; VIRGINIA JOHNSON, Sgt. Unit 1, Virginia Correctional
Center for Women; EDWARDS, Ms., Counselor Unit 1, Virginia
Correctional Center for Women,
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond.
Robert E. Payne, Senior
District Judge. (3:14-cv-00389-REP-MHL)

Submitted:

December 16, 2014

Decided:

January 7, 2015

Before NIEMEYER and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Sharon Falzone, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-7280

Doc: 10

Filed: 01/07/2015

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Sharon

Falzone

appeals

the

district

court’s

order

dismissing her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) action without prejudice
pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Rule 41(b) permits a district court to dismiss an action based
on a plaintiff’s failure to comply with any order.
Civ. P. 41(b).

See Fed. R.

Where a litigant has ignored a district court’s

express warning that noncompliance will result in dismissal, it
is appropriate for the court to dismiss the case.
v. Carlson, 882 F.2d 93, 95-96 (4th Cir. 1989).
the

record

in

this

case,

we

find

no

See Ballard

Having reviewed

reversible

error.

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court.

Falzone v. Johns, No. 3:14-cv-00389-REP-MHL (E.D. Va.

Aug. 19, 2014).
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