Court Opinion

ID: 9412227
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-07-28 21:01:50.180386+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:41:33.538760
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1005      Doc: 6         Filed: 07/27/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 23-1005

        SARIA WALKER,

                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

                     v.

        SCIENTIFIC ALLOYS CORP.; SPECIALTY METALS SMELTERS AND
        REFINERS LLC; SPECIALTY METALS CORP.; FITE BAC TECHNOLOGY;
        DARBY DENTAL SUPPLY LLC; SOFIDENT DENTAL LAB SUPPLY;
        DENTAL EZ; SUREPURE CHEMETALS INC.; GPS DENTAL PRODUCTS;
        MERCURY REFINING LLC; IVOCLAR VIVADENT; DENTRON;
        ENGLEHAND CORP SPECIALTY METALS, Div Dental Dept.; PRECISION
        INSTRUMENTS PVT LTD.; UNITED STATES FOOD AND DRUG
        ADMINISTRATION,

                            Defendants - Appellees.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
        Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior District Judge. (6:22-cv-04249-HMH)

        Submitted: July 25, 2023                                            Decided: July 27, 2023

        Before WYNN and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Saria Walker, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-1005      Doc: 6        Filed: 07/27/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

              Saria Walker appeals the district court’s order adopting the recommendation of the

        magistrate judge and dismissing her civil action as frivolous. We have reviewed the record

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

        Sci. Alloys Corp., No. 6:22-cv-04249-HMH (D.S.C. Dec. 21, 2022). 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