Koonce v. Astrue

Fourth Circuit

Koonce v. Astrue

511 F. App'x 269

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 26, 2013

DocketNo. 13-1012

StatusPublished

This text of 511 F. App'x 269 (Koonce v. Astrue) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Koonce v. Astrue, 511 F. App'x 269 (4th Cir. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Mary Ann Smelser Koonce appeals the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation to dismiss her civil action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Koonce v. Astrue, No. 3:12-cv-00256-JAG, 2012 WL 6608969 (E.D.Va. Dec. 18, 2012). 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.

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

PER CURIAM:

Mary Ann Smelser Koonce appeals the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation to dismiss her civil action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Koonce v. Astrue, No. 3:12-cv-00256-JAG, 2012 WL 6608969 (E.D.Va. Dec. 18, 2012). 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

511 F. App'x 269, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/koonce-v-astrue-ca4-2013.