Court Opinion

ID: 9895021
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-03 21:00:48.068177+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:10:18.008057
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1746      Doc: 12         Filed: 11/02/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 23-1746

        MARTHA CARRASCAL,

                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

                     v.

        AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC.,

                            Defendant - Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
        Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:22-cv-00825-LMB-JFA)

        Submitted: October 31, 2023                                  Decided: November 2, 2023

        Before HARRIS and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit
        Judge.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Martha Carrascal, Appellant Pro Se. Daniel E. Farrington, Lauren Genvert Goetzl,
        FISHER & PHILLIPS LLP, Washington, D.C., for Appellee.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-1746      Doc: 12         Filed: 11/02/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Martha Carrascal appeals the district court’s order dismissing her employment

        discrimination action as a sanction for failing to comply with her discovery obligations

        pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(b)(2)(A)(v). After reviewing the record, we conclude that

        the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Carrascal’s action. See Mey v.

        Phillips, 71 F.4th 203, 217 (4th Cir. 2023) (stating standard). Accordingly, we affirm the

        district court’s judgment. Carrascal v. Am. Airlines, Inc., No. 1:22-cv-00825-LMB-JFA

        (E.D. Va. June 15, 2023). 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