Court Opinion

ID: 9947031
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-01 21:01:33.982661+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:25:45.545299
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-2182      Doc: 6        Filed: 02/29/2024     Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 23-2182

        ABRAHAM G. PINZON,

                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

                     v.

        SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION; CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
        HEALTH CARE SERVICES, Medi-cal program; ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF
        THE UNITED STATES COURTS FOR THE U.S. COURTS OF CALIFORNIA;
        UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES;
        MENDOCINO COUNTY HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY,

                            Defendants - Appellees.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.
        Julie R. Rubin, District Judge. (1:23-cv-02714-JRR)

        Submitted: February 27, 2024                                 Decided: February 29, 2024

        Before WILKINSON, WYNN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Abraham G. Pinzon, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-2182      Doc: 6        Filed: 02/29/2024     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

              Abraham G. Pinzon appeals the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice

        his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). We have reviewed the

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

        Pinzon v. Soc. Sec. Admin., No. 1:23-cv-02714-JRR (D. Md. Oct. 12, 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