Court Opinion

ID: 9405268
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-06-27 21:00:52.437702+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:20.608451
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-2102      Doc: 15         Filed: 06/26/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 22-2102

        PEARLINE RUFFIN,

                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

                     v.

        ANTHEM, INC.,

                            Defendant - Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
        Norfolk. Lawrence R. Leonard, Magistrate Judge. (2:21-cv-00251-LRL)

        Submitted: June 22, 2023                                          Decided: June 26, 2023

        Before HARRIS and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Pearline Ruffin, Appellant Pro Se. David Edward Constine, III, Trial Attorney, Andrew J.
        Henson, TROUTMAN PEPPER HAMILTON SANDERS LLP, Richmond, Virginia, for
        Appellee.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-2102         Doc: 15     Filed: 06/26/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

              Pearline Ruffin appeals the district court’s order granting Anthem, Inc., summary

        judgment on Ruffin’s discrimination, harassment, and retaliation claims, brought pursuant

        to 42 U.S.C. § 1981. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the informal

        brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b); Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“The

        informal brief is an important document; under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited

        to issues preserved in that brief.”). We have reviewed the record in conjunction with the

        arguments Ruffin raises on appeal and discern no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm

        the district court’s judgment. Ruffin v. Anthem, Inc., No. 2:21-cv-00251-LRL (E.D. Va.

        Sept. 23, 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