ZARA ELLIS SADLER, PhD v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1068 n.1 4th Cir. 1993

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-1054
ZARA ELLIS SADLER, PhD,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
BARBARA CLAIRE TILLEY, PhD,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Charleston. David C. Norton, District Judge.
(2:05-cv-03234-DCN)
Submitted: March 29, 2006 Decided: April 11, 2006
Before LUTTIG, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Zara Ellis Sadler, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).

-- 1 of 2 --

- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Zara Ellis Sadler appeals the district court’s order
denying relief on her complaint pursuant to Title VII of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e - 2000e-17 (2000), and
denying her motion to amend her complaint. After a thorough review
of the record, we conclude that the district court should have
permitted Sadler to amend her complaint as a matter of right under
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a) because no responsive
pleading had been filed. Thus, even though Sadler sought leave to
amend, she actually did not need to do so. See Domino Sugar
Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1068 n.1 (4th
Cir. 1993); Smith v. Blackledge, 451 F.2d 1201, 1202-03 (4th Cir.
1971). We therefore vacate the district court’s order dismissing
Sadler’s action and denying Sadler’s motion to amend her complaint,
and we remand the case for further proceedings consistent with this
opinion. 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.
VACATED AND REMANDED

-- 2 of 2 --