Court Opinion

ID: 9881792
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-03 21:01:08.184209+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:48:18.095190
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1523      Doc: 7        Filed: 10/02/2023     Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 23-1523

        DAVID M. SHIPP,

                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

                     v.

        XAVIER BECERRA, Secretary of Health and Human Services; MERRICK B.
        GARLAND, US Attorney General; EREK L. BARRON, US Attorney, Maryland,

                            Defendants - Appellees.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt.
        Julie R. Rubin, District Judge. (8:22-cv-01295-JRR)

        Submitted: September 28, 2023                                     Decided: October 2, 2023

        Before NIEMEYER, THACKER, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        David M. Shipp, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-1523     Doc: 7         Filed: 10/02/2023    Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

              David M. Shipp appeals the district court’s order dismissing his civil complaint in

        part and granting summary judgment in favor of the remaining Defendant prior to formal

        discovery. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. See Shaw v.

        Foreman, 59 F.4th 121, 128-29 (4th Cir. 2023); Corder v. Antero Res. Corp., 57 F.4th 384,

        401 (4th Cir. 2023) (collectively stating standards). Accordingly, we affirm the district

        court’s judgment. Shipp v. Becerra, No. 8:22-cv-01295-JRR (D. Md. Mar. 16, 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