Case Name: Marie Therese ASSA'AD-FALTAS, Party-in-Interest-Appellant, and United States of America, Plaintiff, v. Nikki HALEY, in her official capacity as the Governor of South Carolina; State of South Carolina, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-11-26
Citations: 489 F. App'x 730
Docket Number: No. 12-1853
Parties: Marie Therese ASSA’AD-FALTAS, Party-in-Interest-Appellant, and United States of America, Plaintiff, v. Nikki HALEY, in her official capacity as the Governor of South Carolina; State of South Carolina, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and SHEDD and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 489
Pages: 730–730

Head Matter:
Marie Therese ASSA’AD-FALTAS, Party-in-Interest-Appellant, and United States of America, Plaintiff, v. Nikki HALEY, in her official capacity as the Governor of South Carolina; State of South Carolina, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 12-1853.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Nov. 20, 2012.
Decided: Nov. 26, 2012.
Marie Therese Assa’ad-Faltas, Appellant Pro Se. Robert D. Cook, Office of the Attorney General of South Carolina, James Emory Smith, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and SHEDD and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Marie Therese Assa'ad-Faltas, M.D., M.P.H., appeals the district court's order denying her Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b) motion asking that the district court reverse its denial of her motion to intervene in the district court action. Assa'ad-Faltas has also moved for in forma pauperis status. We have reviewed the record and find that Assa'ad-Faltas's motion failed to establish any of the grounds necessary for Rule 60(b) relief. Accordingly, although we grant Assa'ad-Faltas's application for in forma pauperis status, we affirm the district court's order. See Assa'ad-Faltas v. Haley, No. 2:11-cv-02958-RMG (D.S.C. June 27, 2012). 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.