Yvett Rudolph v. HR Specialist , 590 F. App'x 228 ( 2015 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-1797
YVETT C. RUDOLPH,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
HR SPECIALIST, of Business Management Daily; BUSINESS
MANAGEMENT DAILY, d/b/a Capital Information Group Inc.,
doing business as Capital Information Group Inc.; CAPITAL
INFORMATION GROUP INCORPORATED; ALLIE P. ASH, JR.,
President and Officer Capital Information Group Inc.;
PHILLIP ASH, Vice President, Officer, and Director Capital
Information Group, Publisher for HR Specialist; STEVEN
STURM, Vice President, Officer of Capital Information Group
Inc.; PATRICK DI DOMENICO, Editorial Director Business
Management Daily; ADAM GOLDSTEIN, Associate Publisher
Business Management Daily; WILLIAM H. STURGES, Esquire,
Editor of HR Specialist,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema,
District Judge. (1:14-cv-00477-LMB-JFA)
Submitted: December 22, 2014 Decided: January 14, 2015
Before GREGORY, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Yvett C. Rudolph, Appellant Pro Se. John Matthew Baird, Arvind
Jairam, DUANE MORRIS, LLP, Washington, D.C., for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
PER CURIAM:
Yvett C. Rudolph appeals the district court’s order
dismissing her civil action for failure to state a claim. On
appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in Rudolph’s
informal brief. 4th Cir. R. 34(b); see also United States v.
Brooks, 524 F.3d 549, 556 & n.11 (4th Cir. 2008) (deeming claim
raised for first time in reply brief abandoned). Insofar as
Rudolph challenges the order transferring her case from the
United States District Court for the District of Delaware, we
lack jurisdiction to review this order. Brock v. Entre Computer
Ctrs., Inc., 933 F.2d 1253, 1257 (4th Cir. 1991). We have
reviewed the record in light of Rudolph’s remaining claims and
find no reversible error. Accordingly, we grant leave to
proceed in forma pauperis and affirm substantially for the
reasons stated by the district court. Rudolph v. HR Specialist,
No. 1:14-cv-00477-LMB-JFA (E.D. Va. June 23, 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