LuLu Girma v. U. S. Equal Employment
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999952411-2] Originating case number: 1:16-cv-00406-LO-IDD Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. . Mailed to: Girma. [16-1973]
Pg: 1 of 2
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Plaintiff - Appellant,
U. S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Liam O’Grady, District Judge.
February 23, 2017
February 27, 2017
Before SHEDD and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
LuLu Girma, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 2
LuLu Girma appeals from the district court’s order dismissing
failing to comply with the court’s prior order directing him to
pay the required filing fee. *
no reversible error.
We have reviewed the record and find
Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in
forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal for the reasons stated by
the district court.
Girma v. U.S. Equal Emp’t Opportunity Comm’n,
No. 1:16-cv-00406-LO-IDD (E.D. Va. filed July 26, 2016; entered
July 27, 2016).
We dispense with oral argument because the facts
and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
We conclude that the district court’s order is final and
appealable because the defect identified by the district court
must be cured by something more than an amendment to the
allegations in the complaint. See Goode v. Cent. Va. Legal Aid
Soc’y, Inc., 807 F.3d 619, 623-24 (4th Cir. 2015).
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?