Court Opinion

ID: 1002224
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 18:07:39.66454+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:35:21.947060
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

STEVEN E. LANG, on behalf of
himself and others similarly
situated,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
                                                                     No. 00-1236
v.

NORDSTROM, INCORPORATED,
Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria.
Claude M. Hilton, Chief District Judge.
(CA-99-1175-A)

Submitted: July 25, 2000

Decided: August 9, 2000

Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________________________________________

Affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded by unpublished per
curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

Steven E. Lang, Appellant Pro Se. Stephen William Robinson,
MCGUIRE, WOODS, BATTLE & BOOTHE, L.L.P., McLean, Vir-
ginia, for Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See
Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Steven E. Lang appeals from the district court's order dismissing
with prejudice Lang's action under the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29
U.S.C.A. §§ 201-219 (West 1998 & Supp. 2000). We find that the
district court properly dismissed Lang's action to the extent that he
sought to bring a class action because, as a pro se litigant, Lang was
not an appropriate class representative. See Oxendine v. Williams, 509
F.2d 1405, 1407 (4th Cir. 1975). To the extent that the district court's
order dismissed Lang's individual claims, we vacate the order and
remand to allow Lang to pursue his individual claims. We dispense
with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are ade-
quately presented in the materials before the court and argument
would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED IN PART, VACATED IN PART,
AND REMANDED

                    2