Court Opinion

ID: 9412370
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-07-29 21:00:59.243626+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:41:14.270948
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1389      Doc: 14         Filed: 07/28/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 23-1389

        JEREMY JONES,

                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

                     v.

        SOUTH ATLANTIC GALVANIZING; RUSTY WILLIAMS; BRIAN SOLOIS,

                            Defendants - Appellees.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
        Greenville. Timothy M. Cain, District Judge. (6:22-cv-01152-TMC)

        Submitted: July 25, 2023                                          Decided: July 28, 2023

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

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Jeremy Jones, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer Lee Sease Cluverius, Ashley Robertson Parr,
        MAYNARD NEXSEN, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellees.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-1389      Doc: 14         Filed: 07/28/2023      Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Jeremy Jones appeals the district court’s order accepting the magistrate judge’s

        recommendation and dismissing his civil complaint. We have reviewed the record and

        discern no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. * Jones v. S.

        Atl. Galvanizing, No. 6:22-cv-01152-TMC (D.S.C., Feb. 1, 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

               *
                 We decline to consider Jones’ workers’ compensation retaliation claim, which he
        raises for the first time on appeal. See In re Under Seal, 749 F.3d 276, 285 (4th Cir. 2014).

                                                     2