Court Opinion

ID: 9947151
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-02 21:00:50.996505+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:25:53.330244
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 24-1025      Doc: 8         Filed: 03/01/2024    Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 24-1025

        PAKUJA CRYSTAL VANG,

                             Plaintiff - Appellant,

                      v.

        COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,

                             Defendant - Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at
        Asheville. Martin K. Reidinger, Chief District Judge. (1:22-cv-00253-MR)

        Submitted: February 27, 2024                                        Decided: March 1, 2024

        Before WILKINSON, WYNN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Pakuja Crystal Vang, Appellant Pro Se. Patrick Eugene Roach, SOCIAL SECURITY
        ADMINISTRATION, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 24-1025      Doc: 8        Filed: 03/01/2024     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

              Pakuja Crystal Vang appeals the district court’s order granting the Commissioner

        of Social Security’s motion for judgment on the pleadings and dismissing without prejudice

        Vang’s complaint for failure to exhaust her administrative remedies. See 42 U.S.C.

        § 405(g); Smith v. Berryhill, 139 S. Ct. 1765, 1772 (2019). We have reviewed the record

        and discern no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment.

        Vang v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., No. 1:22-cv-00253-MR (W.D.N.C. Dec. 6, 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