Jean Kaufman v. US

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:12-cv-00237. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999589668]. Mailed to: J. Kaufman. [15-1122]

Download PDF
Appeal: 15-1122 Doc: 9 Filed: 05/26/2015 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-1122 JEAN ELIZABETH KAUFMAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Bluefield. David A. Faber, Senior District Judge. (1:12-cv-00237) Submitted: May 21, 2015 Decided: May 26, 2015 Before MOTZ, KING, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jean Elizabeth Kaufman, Appellant Pro Se. John Fulton Gianola, Stephen Michael Horn, Assistant United States Attorneys, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 15-1122 Doc: 9 Filed: 05/26/2015 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Jean Elizabeth Kaufman appeals the district court’s order dismissing, after a bench trial, her civil action brought pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C.A. §§ 1346(b), 2671–2680 (West 2006 & Supp. 2014). The district court dismissed Kaufman’s complaint because it found that the United States had not waived its sovereign immunity to suit for the claims raised by Kaufman and, thus, that matter jurisdiction over Kaufman’s claims. record and discern no reversible error. it dispense No. 1:12-cv-00237 with contentions are oral (S.D.W. argument adequately Va. because presented in subject We have reviewed the Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. States, lacked Jan. the the Kaufman v. United 7, 2015). We facts and legal materials before this court and argument would not 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?