Case Name: Chase Carmen HUNTER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Al REDMER, individually and in his official capacity as Commissioner of insurance for Maryland; Maryland Insurance Administration, Respondents-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-12-21
Citations: 625 F. App'x 216
Docket Number: No. 15-2102
Parties: Chase Carmen HUNTER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Al REDMER, individually and in his official capacity as Commissioner of insurance for Maryland; Maryland Insurance Administration, Respondents-Appellees.
Judges: Before DIAZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 625
Pages: 216–217

Head Matter:
Chase Carmen HUNTER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Al REDMER, individually and in his official capacity as Commissioner of insurance for Maryland; Maryland Insurance Administration, Respondents-Appellees.
No. 15-2102.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Dec. 17, 2015.
Decided: Dec. 21, 2015.
Chase Carmen Hunter, Appellant Pro Se. John Van Lear Dorsey, Assistant Attorney General, Brandy Jessica Gray, Office of the Attorney General of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
Before DIAZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Dismissed in part, affirmed in part by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are hot binding precedent in this circuit;
PER CURIAM:
Chase Carmen Hunter appeals the district court's orders denying her requests for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. To the extent she seeks to appeal the denial of her. request for a temporary restraining order, we are without jurisdiction to .consider her appeal. See Virginia v. Tenneco, Inc., 538 F.2d 1026, 1029-30 (4th Cir.1976).
We do possess jurisdiction to review, for abuse of discretion, the district court's de nial of her request for a preliminary injunction. 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1) (2012); League of Women Voters of N.C. v. North Carolina, 769 F.3d 224, 250 (4th Cir.2014). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. We thus affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Hunter v. Redmer, No. 1:15-cv-02047JKB (E.D.Va. Sept. 4, 2015).
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal in part and affirm in part. 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.
DISMISSED IN PART, AFFIRMED IN PART.