Case ID: f-appx_538/html/0353-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Cynthia L. FOULKE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Marla G. DECKER, in her official capacity as the Secretary of Public Safety, Commonwealth of Virginia; Janet Polarek, in her official capacity as Secretary of the Commonwealth of Virginia; W. Steven Flaherty, in his individual capacity and official capacity as the Superintendent of Virginia State Police; Gary B. Payne, in his individual capacity; James L. Hopkins, in his individual capacity; Nathan E. Hollandsworth, in his individual capacity, Defendants-Appellees, and Virginia State Police; Commonwealth of Virginia, Defendants.
    No. 13-1482.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Aug. 14, 2013.
    Decided: Aug. 27, 2013.
    Cynthia L. Foulke, Appellant Pro Se. George Walerian Chabalewski, Christy Monolo, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appel-lees.
    Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
   PER CURIAM:

Cynthia L. Foulke appeals the district court’s order denying relief on her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Foulke v. Decker, No. 6:12-cv-00006-NKM-RSB, 2012 WL 4356692 (W.D.Va. Sept. 24, 2012). 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. 
      
       We note that Foulke did not indicate in her notice of appeal that she sought to appeal the district court's order denying reconsideration. See Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(4)(B)(ii). Although she mentioned the order denying reconsideration in her informal brief, the brief was not filed within the appeal period. See Smith v. Barry, 502 U.S. 244, 245, 112 S.Ct. 678, 116 L.Ed.2d 678 (1992) (holding that appellate brief may serve as notice of appeal provided it otherwise complies with rules governing proper timing and substance).