Chase Hunter v. Jacqueline Cunningham

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for other relief [999635403-2], denying Motion for other relief [999635390-2], denying Motion for other relief [999634055-2]; denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999634076-2]; denying Motion to compel [999626370-2] Originating case number: 3:14-cv-00704-HEH Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999693607].. [15-1145]

Appeal: 15-1145

Doc: 19

Filed: 11/05/2015

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-1145

CHASE CARMEN HUNTER,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
JACQUELINE K. CUNNINGHAM, Individually, & In Her Official
Capacity
as
Commissioner
of
Insurance
for
Virginia;
VIRGINIA ATTORNEY GENERAL; VIRGINIA BUREAU OF INSURANCE,
The,
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond.
Henry E. Hudson, District
Judge. (3:14-cv-00704-HEH)

Submitted:

August 17, 2015

Before DUNCAN
Circuit Judge.

and

DIAZ,

Decided:

Circuit

Judges,

and

November 5, 2015

DAVIS,

Senior

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Chase Carmen Hunter, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-1145

Doc: 19

Filed: 11/05/2015

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Chase

Carmen

Hunter

appeals

the

district

court’s

order

dismissing her complaint for failure to state a claim pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6).
We

have

reviewed

the

record

and

find

no

reversible

error.

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

Hunter v. Cunningham, No. 3:14-cv-00704-HEH (E.D. Va.

Jan. 5, 2015).
and

other

We also deny her motion seeking mandamus relief

pending

motions,

including

her

motions

to

electronically file her submissions, proceed in forma pauperis,
and correct the docket.

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

2