Yan Donovan v. EPA

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:15-cv-00178-TSE-MSN. Copies to all parties and the district court. [999722088]. Mailed to: Yan Donovan. [15-1960]

Download PDF
Appeal: 15-1960 Doc: 16 Filed: 12/21/2015 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-1960 YAN DONOVAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention Office of Pesticide Programs, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T.S. Ellis, III, Senior District Judge. (1:15-cv-00178-TSE-MSN) Submitted: December 17, 2015 Decided: December 21, 2015 Before DIAZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed as modified by unpublished per curiam opinion. Yan Donovan, Appellant Pro Se. David Moskowitz, Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 15-1960 Doc: 16 Filed: 12/21/2015 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Yan Donovan appeals the district court’s order dismissing her complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Civ. P. 12(b)(1). reversible error. See Fed. R. We have reviewed the record and find no Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Donovan v. U.S. Envtl. Prot. Agency, No. 1:15-cv-00178-TSE-MSN (E.D. Va. filed June 26, 2015 & entered June 29, 2015). However, we affirm as modified to reflect that the dismissal is without prejudice to Donovan’s right to refile in the event she exhausts her administrative remedies. We dispense with oral contentions argument adequately because presented in the the facts and materials legal before this court are and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED 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?