Case Name: Angela BACHMAN, Personal Representative of the Estate of Jeffrey Bachman, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION; Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Incorporated, a California Corporation, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-11-21
Citations: 454 F. App'x 233
Docket Number: No. 11-1402
Parties: Angela BACHMAN, Personal Representative of the Estate of Jeffrey Bachman, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION; Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Incorporated, a California Corporation, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 454
Pages: 233–234

Head Matter:
Angela BACHMAN, Personal Representative of the Estate of Jeffrey Bachman, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION; Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Incorporated, a California Corporation, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 11-1402.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Oct. 20, 2011.
Decided: Nov. 21, 2011.
Michael W. Patrick, Law Office of Michael W. Patrick, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, for Appellant. Joel H. Smith, Shawn B. Deery, Bowman and Brooke LLP, Columbia, South Carolina; Leslie Lane Mize, Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Angela Bachman ("Bachman"), as personal representative of the estate of Jeffrey Bachman, appeals the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing her civil complaint. The district court dismissed the action on the grounds that it was barred by res judicata because of Bachman's earlier California action. See Jaffe v. Accredited Surety & Cas. Co., 294 F.3d 584, 590-91 (4th Cir.2002) (regarding full faith and credit given to prior state court actions in any later federal suit). We review de novo a district court's grant of a motion to dismiss under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), see Philips v. Pitt Cnty. Mem'l Hasp., 572 F.3d 176, 179-80 (4th Cir.2009), and our review of the record reveals no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Bachman v. Toyota Motor Corp., No. 1:10-cv-263, 2011 WL 1447617 (M.D.N.C. Apr. 14, 2011). 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.