Case ID: f-appx_266/html/0257-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Patricia A. FRIERSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Terry L. PARKE, an individual; Mike Johnson, individually as an officer of the City of Columbia Police Department; Columbia, City of; Palmetto Health Alliance, Defendants—Appellees.
    No. 07-1763.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Jan. 30, 2008.
    Decided: Feb. 26, 2008.
    Patricia A. Frierson, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Gordon Cooper, Office of The City Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina; Patrick J. Flynn, USC School of Law, Columbia, South Carolina; William Henry Davidson, II, David Leon Morrison, Matthew Blaine Rosbrugh, Davidson, Morrison & Lindemann, PA, Columbia, South Carolina; Barbara A. Chesley, Richardson, Plowden & Robinson, PA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.
    Before WILKINSON and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
   PER CURIAM:

Patricia A. Frierson appeals the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation and dismissing Frierson’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) action for failure to prosecute and for noncompliance with court orders. A plaintiffs failure to prosecute or to comply with the federal procedural rules or an order of the court may warrant involuntary dismissal. Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b). We review a district court’s dismissal under Rule 41(b) for abuse of discretion. Ballard v. Carlson, 882 F.2d 93, 95-96 (4th Cir.1989). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Frierson v. Parke, No. 3:06-cv-01892-JFA (D.S.C. July 12, 2007). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.