Chase Hunter v. Al Redmer

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:15-cv-02047-JKB. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999722233]. Mailed to: none. [15-2102]

Appeal: 15-2102

Doc: 17

Filed: 12/21/2015

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-2102

CHASE CARMEN HUNTER,
Petitioner – Appellant,
v.
AL REDMER, individually and in his official capacity as
Commissioner of insurance for Maryland; MARYLAND INSURANCE
ADMINISTRATION,
Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore.
James K. Bredar, District Judge.
(1:15-cv-02047-JKB)

Submitted:

December 17, 2015

Decided:

December 21, 2015

Before DIAZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Dismissed in part, affirmed in part by unpublished per curiam
opinion.

Chase Carmen Hunter, Appellant Pro Se. John Van Lear Dorsey,
Assistant Attorney General, Brandy Jessica Gray, OFFICE OF THE
ATTORNEY
GENERAL
OF
MARYLAND,
Baltimore,
Maryland,
for
Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-2102

Doc: 17

Filed: 12/21/2015

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Chase
denying

Carmen

her

Hunter

requests

appeals

for

preliminary injunction.

a

the

district

temporary

court’s

restraining

orders

order

and

To the extent she seeks to appeal the

denial of her request for a temporary restraining order, we are
without jurisdiction to consider her appeal.

See Virginia v.

Tenneco, Inc., 538 F.2d 1026, 1029-30 (4th Cir. 1976).
We

do

possess

jurisdiction

to

review,

for

abuse

of

discretion, the district court’s denial of her request for a
preliminary injunction.

28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1) (2012); League

of Women Voters of N.C. v. North Carolina, 769 F.3d 229, 250
(4th

Cir.

2014).

We

have

reviewed

the

record

and

find

no

reversible error.

We thus affirm for the reasons stated by the

district

See

court.

Hunter v.

Redmer,

No.

1:15-cv-02047-JKB

(E.D. Va. Sept. 4, 2015).
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal in part and affirm in
part.
legal
before

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
contentions
this

court

are

adequately

and

argument

presented

would

not

in
aid

the
the

materials
decisional

process.

DISMISSED IN PART,
AFFIRMED IN PART

2