Case Name: Tawana Jean COOPER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Pamela A. VAROUXIS, Executrix and Trustee of the Theodore Varouxis Estate and Trust; John T. Frey, Clerk of the Circuit Court, Fairfax County, individually and in his official capacity; Nelson L. Knott, Comptroller of the Circuit Court, Fairfax County Virginia, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-10-17
Citations: 669 F. App'x 188
Docket Number: No. 16-1723
Parties: Tawana Jean COOPER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Pamela A. VAROUXIS, Executrix and Trustee of the Theodore Varouxis Estate and Trust; John T. Frey, Clerk of the Circuit Court, Fairfax County, individually and in his official capacity; Nelson L. Knott, Comptroller of the Circuit Court, Fairfax County Virginia, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 669
Pages: 188–189

Head Matter:
Tawana Jean COOPER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Pamela A. VAROUXIS, Executrix and Trustee of the Theodore Varouxis Estate and Trust; John T. Frey, Clerk of the Circuit Court, Fairfax County, individually and in his official capacity; Nelson L. Knott, Comptroller of the Circuit Court, Fairfax County Virginia, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 16-1723
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: October 13, 2016
Decided: October 17, 2016
Tawana Jean Cooper, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Arthur Sottolano, Chadwick Washington Moriarty Elmore & Bunn PC, Glen Allen, Virginia; Alexander Francuz-enko, Philip Corliss Krone, Cook Craig & Francuzenko, PLLC, Fairfax, Virginia, for Appellees.
Before NIEMEYER, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Tawana Jean Cooper appeals the district court's orders denying her complaint challenging a state court civil order regarding a property issue and denying her post-judgment motions for reconsideration and to enter default judgment. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Cooper v. Varouxis, No. 1:16-cv-00025-CMH-TCB, 2016 WL 2894913 (E.D. Va. filed May 16 & entered May 17, 2016; June 14 & 17, 2016). 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
To the extent that Cooper seeks damages because she believes that the Defendants committed fraud upon the state court, however, the Rooker-Feldman doctrine does not bar her claims. See Great W. Mining & Mineral Co. v. Fox Rothschild LLP, 615 F.3d 159, 172-73 (3d Cir. 2010) (holding that Rooker-Feldman doctrine did not deprive district court of jurisdiction in 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) action alleging that plaintiff's losses in state court action resulted from a conspiracy between the defendants and certain members of the state judiciary). Nonetheless, the district court correctly dismissed those claims for failure to state a claim.