Case Name: Charles T. CEPHAS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MARYLAND RURAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION BOARD OF DIRECTORS; Cheryl Victoria Beard, Individually; Elaine Patricia Hill, Individually; Mary Boyce, Individually; Leroy Boyce, Sr., Individually; Regina M. Finch, Individually; Christina Lowman, Individually; Raymond Skinner, Secretary; Anthony J. Mohan; Calvin Wink, Jr., CME, CMI; Kevin Brooks, Interim Director, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-11-02
Citations: 452 F. App'x 401
Docket Number: No. 11-1079
Parties: Charles T. CEPHAS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MARYLAND RURAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION BOARD OF DIRECTORS; Cheryl Victoria Beard, Individually; Elaine Patricia Hill, Individually; Mary Boyce, Individually; Leroy Boyce, Sr., Individually; Regina M. Finch, Individually; Christina Lowman, Individually; Raymond Skinner, Secretary; Anthony J. Mohan; Calvin Wink, Jr., CME, CMI; Kevin Brooks, Interim Director, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 452
Pages: 401–402

Head Matter:
Charles T. CEPHAS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MARYLAND RURAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION BOARD OF DIRECTORS; Cheryl Victoria Beard, Individually; Elaine Patricia Hill, Individually; Mary Boyce, Individually; Leroy Boyce, Sr., Individually; Regina M. Finch, Individually; Christina Lowman, Individually; Raymond Skinner, Secretary; Anthony J. Mohan; Calvin Wink, Jr., CME, CMI; Kevin Brooks, Interim Director, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 11-1079.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Oct. 27, 2011.
Decided: Nov. 2, 2011.
Charles T. Cephas, Appellant Pro Se. Jonathan R. Krasnoff, Sarah Whynne Finnegan Rice, Office of the Attorney General of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland; David Alan Rosenberg, Ford & Harrison, LLP, Washington, DC, for Appellees.
Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Charles T. Cephas appeals the district court's order dismissing his civil action for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Cephas v. Md. Rural Dev. Corp., No. 1:10-cv-00813-JFM (D.Md. Dec. 10, 2010). We deny as moot Appellee Brooks' motion to strike Cephas' reply briefs. 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.