Nedra Carr-Stephenson v. OFFICEMAX NORTH AMERICA, INC., OfficeMax Store 562

13-2430Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit05.08.2014

Gesamter Gesetzestext

ON REHEARING
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-2430
NEDRA CARR-STEPHENSON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
OFFICEMAX NORTH AMERICA, INC., OfficeMax Store #562,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Newport News. Raymond A. Jackson,
District Judge. (4:13-cv-00075-RAJ-TEM)
Submitted: July 21, 2014 Decided: August 5, 2014
Before MOTZ, Circuit Judge, and HAMILTON and DAVIS, Senior
Circuit Judges.
Panel rehearing granted, en banc rehearing denied, and affirmed
by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Nedra Carr-Stephenson, Appellant Pro Se. Bryan K. Meals, DAVEY
& BROGAN, PC, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Nedra Carr-Stephenson appeals the district court’s
order granting Defendant’s motion to dismiss her civil
complaint.∗ On appeal, we confine our review to the issues
raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b).
Because Carr-Stephenson does not challenge in her informal brief
the basis for the district court’s disposition, she has
forfeited appellate review of the court’s order. Id.
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. 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.
PANEL REHEARING GRANTED;
EN BANC REHEARING DENIED;
AFFIRMED
∗ In an opinion issued on March 31, 2014, we dismissed Carr-
Stephenson’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction on the ground that
her notice of appeal was untimely filed. Carr-Stephenson then
filed a petition for en banc rehearing that persuades us she
timely filed a notice of appeal that did not appear in the
electronic record. Accordingly, although we deny Carr-
Stephenson’s petition for rehearing en banc, we grant panel
rehearing, and conclude that Carr-Stephenson did in fact file a
timely notice of appeal. Accordingly, we vacate the prior
opinion and issue this opinion in its stead.

-- 2 of 2 --

Setzen Sie Ihre Recherche in ChatGPT oder Claude fort

Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.