Dawn Figman v. Sprint

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-2371
DAWN FIGMAN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
SPRINT,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Charlottesville. Norman K. Moon, District
Judge. (CA-01-3)
Submitted: March 6, 2003 Decided: March 13, 2003
Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Dawn Figman, Appellant Pro Se. Neal Lawrence Walters,
Charlottesville, Virginia; Timothy J. Nieman, RHOADS & SIMON,
L.L.P., Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Dawn Figman appeals the district court’s order denying her
Motion for Relief of Judgment Order filed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ.
P. 60. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See
Figman v. Sprint, No. CA-01-3 (W.D. Va. Nov. 13, 2002). We deny
Figman’s motion for leave to amend her informal brief and her
motions for an extension of time. We dispense with oral argument
because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in
the materials before the court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
AFFIRMED

-- 2 of 2 --