Court Opinion

ID: 9396899
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-05-23 21:00:50.922307+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:19:20.360893
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-2121      Doc: 14         Filed: 05/22/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 22-2121

        JERNICE HAMILTON, a/k/a/ Garnaris Hamilton,

                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

                     v.

        ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTIONS, Military Records; DENNIS WILLIAM
        DINGLE, Director 1073592077; CHARLES M. MARTIN, Chair Person,

                            Defendants - Appellees.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
        Charleston. Bruce H. Hendricks, District Judge. (2:21-cv-00195-BHH)

        Submitted: May 18, 2023                                           Decided: May 22, 2023

        Before NIEMEYER, RICHARDSON, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Jernice Hamilton, Appellant Pro Se. Beth Drake, Acting United States Attorney, OFFICE
        OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-2121      Doc: 14         Filed: 05/22/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Jernice Hamilton appeals the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s

        recommendation to dismiss without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction

        Hamilton’s pro se civil action. We have reviewed the record de novo and identified no

        error in the district court’s decision to grant Defendants’ Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) motion

        to dismiss. See Bulger v. Hurwitz, 62 F.4th 127, 135 (4th Cir. 2023) (stating standard of

        review for a Rule 12(b)(1) dismissal). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s dismissal

        order. Hamilton v. Army Bd. for Corrs., No. 2:21-cv-00195-BHH (D.S.C. Sept. 27, 2022).

        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

                                                     2