Daniel Hubert Ross v. R. Jeffries Broxton

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999696762-2], granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999686238-2] Originating case number: 8:14-cv-02967-DKC Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999762067]. Mailed to: Audrey Deloris Ross 11085 Commanders Lane White Plains, MD 20695 Daniel Hubert Ross 11085 Commanders Lane White Plains, MD 20695. [15-2149]

Appeal: 15-2149

Doc: 14

Filed: 02/25/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-2149

DANIEL HUBERT ROSS; AUDREY DELORIS ROSS,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security
Administration in their individual person and official
capacity,
Defendant – Appellee,
and
R.
JEFFRIES
BROXTON,
Field
Office
Manager
in
their
individual person and official capacity; SOCIAL SECURITY
ADMINISTRATION, their successors or persons Acting at their
behest,
Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt.
Deborah K. Chasanow, Senior District
Judge. (8:14-cv-02967-DKC)

Submitted:

February 23, 2016

Decided:

February 25, 2016

Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Appeal: 15-2149

Doc: 14

Filed: 02/25/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

Daniel Hubert Ross, Audrey Deloris Ross, Appellants Pro Se.
Matthew Paul Phelps, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY,
Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Appeal: 15-2149

Doc: 14

Filed: 02/25/2016

Pg: 3 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Daniel
district

Hubert

court’s

Ross
order

and

Audrey

accepting

Deloris

the

Ross

appeal

recommendation

magistrate judge and dismissing their civil action.
reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

of

the
the

We have

Accordingly,

we grant the motions to proceed in forma pauperis and affirm for
the reasons stated by the district court.
8:14-cv-02967-DKC (D. Md. Aug. 27, 2015).

Ross v. Colvin, No.
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

3