Francis Ndika v. Mrs. Maranon


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [1000102285-2] Originating case number: 1:17-cv-00027-JCC-JFA Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000187837]. Mailed to: Francis O. Ndika. [17-1637]

Download PDF
Appeal: 17-1637 Doc: 13 Filed: 11/07/2017 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-1637 FRANCIS O. NDIKA, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MRS. MARANON, Soc. Sec. Supervisor, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (1:17-cv-00027-JCC-JFA) Submitted: October 31, 2017 Decided: November 7, 2017 Before KING, DIAZ, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed as modified by unpublished per curiam opinion. Francis O. Ndika, Appellant Pro Se. Dennis Carl Barghaan, Jr., Rebecca Sara Levenson, Assistant United States Attorneys, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 17-1637 Doc: 13 Filed: 11/07/2017 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Francis O. Ndika appeals the district court’s order granting defendant’s motion to dismiss his complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and Ndika’s claims and find no reversible error. The court’s dismissal, however, should have been without prejudice. See S. Walk at Broadlands Homeowner’s Assoc., Inc. v. OpenBand at Broadlands, LLC, 713 F.3d 175, 185 (4th Cir. 2013). We therefore grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, modify the district court’s order to reflect that the dismissal of Ndika’s complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is without prejudice, and affirm the dismissal as modified. See 28 U.S.C. § 2106 (2012); MM ex rel. DM v. Sch. Dist. Of Greenville Cty., 303 F.3d 523, 536 (4th Cir. 2002) (“[W]e are entitled to affirm the court’s judgment on alternate grounds, if such grounds are apparent from the record.”). 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 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?