Court Opinion

ID: 9957248
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-04-03 21:01:27.30772+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:18:14.470469
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 24-1004      Doc: 7        Filed: 04/02/2024     Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 24-1004

        REVEREND DR. SAMUEL T. WHATLEY; SAMUEL T. WHATLEY, II;
        PACITA D. WHATLEY,

                            Plaintiffs - Appellants,

                     v.

        WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.,

                            Defendant - Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
        Charleston. Sherri A. Lydon, District Judge. (2:23-cv-02015-SAL)

        Submitted: March 28, 2024                                           Decided: April 2, 2024

        Before KING and RUSHING, Circuit Judges, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Samuel T. Whatley, Samuel T. Whatley, II, and Pacita D. Whatley, Appellants Pro Se.
        William Joseph Farley, III, TROUTMAN PEPPER HAMILTON SANDERS LLP,
        Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 24-1004         Doc: 7     Filed: 04/02/2024     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Reverend Dr. Samuel T. Whatley, Samuel T. Whatley II, and Pacita D. Whatley

        appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and

        dismissing without prejudice * the Whatleys’ action alleging violations of the Fair Credit

        Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681 to 1681x; the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15

        U.S.C. §§ 1692 to 1692p; and the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. § 552a. We have reviewed

        the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s

        judgment. Whatley v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., No. 2:23-cv-02015-SAL (D.S.C. Dec. 13,

        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

               *
                The district court’s dismissal without prejudice is a final order because the court
        dismissed the complaint “without granting leave to amend.” Britt v. DeJoy, 45 F.4th 790,
        791 (4th Cir. 2022) (en banc) (order).

                                                    2