Catherine Randolph v. New Technology ( 2014 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-2080
CATHERINE DENISE RANDOLPH,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
NEW TECHNOLOGY,
Defendant - Appellee.
No. 14-2108
CATHERINE DENISE RANDOLPH,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
BALTIMORE CITY STATES ATTORNEY,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the District
of Maryland, at Baltimore. Ellen L. Hollander, William D.
Quarles, Jr., District Judges. (1:14-cv-03068-ELH; 1:14-cv-
03176-WDQ)
Submitted: December 16, 2014 Decided: December 18, 2014
Before DUNCAN and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Catherine Denise Randolph, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
PER CURIAM:
In these consolidated appeals, Catherine Denise
Randolph appeals the district court’s orders dismissing her two
complaints as frivolous and for failure to state a claim. See 28
U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012). We have reviewed the record and
find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Randolph’s
motion and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.
See Randolph v. New Tech., No. 1:14-cv-03068-ELH (D. Md. Oct. 3,
2014); Randolph v. Balt. City States Att’y, No. 1:14-cv-03176-
WDQ (D. Md. Oct. 14, 2014). 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
3