Cynthia Harmon v. DynCorp International, Inc.

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:13-cv-01597-LMB-TRJ Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999717438].. [15-1248]

Appeal: 15-1248

Doc: 27

Filed: 12/14/2015

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-1248

CYNTHIA HARMON; FRAZIER SHACK;
SHONDALE ALFORD; MELVIN RILEY,

YVETTA

HORSFORD

SMITH;

Plaintiffs - Appellants,
v.
DYNCORP INTERNATIONAL, INC., a/k/a DynCorp
LLC, d/b/a DynCorp International FZ-LLC,

International

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria.
Leonie M. Brinkema,
District Judge. (1:13-cv-01597-LMB-TRJ)

Submitted:

October 30, 2015

Before WYNN, FLOYD, and HARRIS,

Decided:

December 14, 2015

Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Scott J. Bloch, John Carl Francesco Vinci, LAW OFFICES OF SCOTT
J. BLOCH, PA, Washington, D.C., for Appellants.
Jason
Branciforte, LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C., Washington, D.C., for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-1248

Doc: 27

Filed: 12/14/2015

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Plaintiffs Cynthia Harmon, Frazier Shack, Yvetta Horsford
Smith, Shondale Alford, and Melvin Riley appeal the district
court’s

order

denying

relief

and

related

discrimination,

International, Inc.

on

their

breach-of-contract,

claims

against

DynCorp

Plaintiffs also appeal a separate order

dismissing without prejudice their qui tam claim under the False
Claims Act.
The

Finding no error, we affirm.

district

court

correctly

held

that

Plaintiffs’

complaint failed to allege sufficient facts to support an alter
ego theory of liability against DynCorp.
various

acts

employed

of

them,

conclusory

misconduct
but

the

by

two

complaint

allegations

imputing

Plaintiffs alleged

businesses
offered
these

that

only

acts

formerly

vague

to

and

DynCorp.

Accordingly, Plaintiffs failed to state a claim of alter ego
liability against DynCorp.
679

(2009).

Defendant,

the

Moreover,
district

See Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662,
because

court

DynCorp

did

not

was

err

in

the

sole

party

dismissing

the

complaint in its entirety.
We further conclude that the district court did not abuse
its discretion by dismissing Plaintiffs’ False Claims Act claim
or denying leave to file a fifth complaint after the first four
proved unsuccessful.
judgment.

We therefore affirm the district court’s

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
2

Appeal: 15-1248

legal
before

Doc: 27

contentions
this

court

Filed: 12/14/2015

Pg: 3 of 3

are

adequately

and

argument

presented

would

not

in
aid

the
the

materials
decisional

process.
AFFIRMED

3