Case Name: Josephat MUA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY, MARYLAND, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2018-02-26
Citations: 712 F. App'x 303
Docket Number: No. 17-2029
Parties: Josephat MUA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF PRINCE GEORGE’S COUNTY, MARYLAND, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before TRAXLER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 712
Pages: 303–304

Head Matter:
Josephat MUA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF PRINCE GEORGE’S COUNTY, MARYLAND, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 17-2029
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: February 22, 2018
Decided: February 26, 2018
Josephat Mua, Appellant Pro Se. Lindsay A. Freedman, Linda Hitt Thatcher, Wayne Bennett Wiseman, THATCHER LAW FIRM, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Ap-pellee.
Before TRAXLER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. '
PER CURIAM:
Josephat Mua appeals the district court's order denying his self-styled motion to reopen his civil case based on new evidence, and challenges the district court's decision to return to Mua a subsequently filed motion for reconsideration. Mua has also filed motions to proceed in forma pauperis, to exceed the length limitations for his informal opening brief, and for leave to file corrected and supplemental briefs. We have reviewed' the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we grant Mua's motions and affirm the district court's order. See Mua v. Bd. of Educ. of Prince George's Cty., Md, No. 8:11-cv-01198-PJM (D. Md. Aug. 1, 2017); see also United States v. Riley, 856 F.3d 326, 328 (4th Cir.) (recognizing this court's ability to "affirm on any grounds apparent from the record" (internal quotation marks omitted)), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 138 S.Ct. 273, 199 L.Ed.2d 175 (2017). 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 discern no reversible error in the district court's refusal to entertain Mua's motion for reconsideration.