Kim v. Potter

Fourth Circuit

Kim v. Potter

416 F. App'x 297

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided March 11, 2011·No. No. 10-1737·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Eun S. Kim appeals the district court’s order dismissing her employment discrimination action pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. [298]*29812(b)(¿). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Kim v. Potter, No. 8:09-cv-2973-DKC, 2010 WL 2253656 (D. Md. June 2, 2010). We deny the motion for appointment of counsel and 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.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

Eun S. Kim appeals the district court’s order dismissing her employment discrimination action pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. [298]*29812(b)(¿). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Kim v. Potter, No. 8:09-cv-2973-DKC, 2010 WL 2253656 (D. Md. June 2, 2010). We deny the motion for appointment of counsel and 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.

Kim v. Potter, 416 F. App'x 297 (4th Cir. 2011).

Pincite

416 F. App'x 297 (Kim v. Potter) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related