Court Opinion

ID: 9403977
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-06-21 21:01:04.89701+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:10.515487
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-1889      Doc: 28         Filed: 06/20/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 22-1889

        HONG TANG,

                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

                     v.

        KURT L. SCHMOKE, in his official and individual capacities; DARLENE
        BRANNIGAN SMITH, in her official capacity; JOSEPH S. WOOD, in his official
        and individual capacities; KATHLEEN ANDERSON, in her official and individual
        capacities; ROGER E. HARTLEY, in his official capacity; CHRISTY LEE
        KOONTZ, in her official and individual capacities; PATRIA DE LANCER
        JULNES, in her official and individual capacities; CATHERINE F. ANDERSEN,
        in her official capacity; UNIVERSITY OF BALTIMORE,

                            Defendants - Appellees.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.
        Stephanie A. Gallagher, District Judge. (1:22-cv-00341-SAG)

        Submitted: June 15, 2023                                          Decided: June 20, 2023

        Before DIAZ, RICHARDSON, and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Hong Tang, Appellant Pro Se. Lillian Lane Reynolds, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY
        GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-1889         Doc: 28     Filed: 06/20/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

              Hong Tang appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983

        complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we

        affirm the district court’s order. Tang v. Schmoke, No. 1:22-cv-00341-SAG (D. Md.

        July 25, 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