In re: Catherine Randolph
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999896626-2] in 16-1653, denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999905070-2] in 16-1885 Originating case number: 1:15-mc-00369 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999948133]. Mailed to: Catherine Denise Randolph. [16-1653, 16-1885]
Appeal: 16-1653
Doc: 16
Filed: 10/17/2016
Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-1653
In Re: CATHERINE DENISE RANDOLPH,
Appellant.
No. 16-1885
In Re: CATHERINE DENISE RANDOLPH,
Appellant.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, Chief District Judge;
J. Frederick Motz, Senior District Judge. (1:15-mc-00369)
Submitted:
October 13, 2016
Decided:
October 17, 2016
Before NIEMEYER, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Catherine Denise Randolph, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 16-1653
Doc: 16
Filed: 10/17/2016
Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
In
appeals
these
the
consolidated
district
appeals,
court’s
orders
Catherine
returning
Denise
her
Randolph
complaints
because the complaints were not in compliance with the prefiling
injunction.
error.
We have reviewed the record and find no reversible
Accpordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis
and dismiss the appeals.
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.
DISMISSED
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?