Terry Steele v. Antony Blinken

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedJune 3, 2024
Docket22-2178
StatusUnpublished

This text of Terry Steele v. Antony Blinken (Terry Steele v. Antony Blinken) 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
Terry Steele v. Antony Blinken, (4th Cir. 2024).

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 22-2178 Doc: 15 Filed: 06/03/2024 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 22-2178

TERRY STEELE,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

ANTONY J. BLINKEN, Secretary, U.S. Department of State,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Rossie David Alston, Jr., District Judge. (1:22-cv-00035-RDA-JFA)

Submitted: May 30, 3024 Decided: June 3, 2024

Before GREGORY and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Terry Steele, Appellant Pro Se. Hugham Chan, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 22-2178 Doc: 15 Filed: 06/03/2024 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:

Terry Steele appeals the district court’s order dismissing his two civil complaints,

which the court consolidated into a single case. Limiting our review to the issues raised in

Steele’s informal brief, we have reviewed the record and discern no reversible error. * See

4th Cir. R. 34(b); see also Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“The

informal brief is an important document; under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited

to issues preserved in that brief.”). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order.

Steele v. Blinken, No. 1:22-cv-00035-RDA-JFA (E.D. Va. filed Oct. 19, 2022 & entered

Oct. 20, 2022). 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

* We decline to consider the new claims that Steele raises on appeal. See In re Under Seal, 749 F.3d 276, 285 (4th Cir. 2014) (recognizing that, absent exceptional circumstances, we do not consider claims raised for the first time on appeal).

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

Related

Samuel Jackson v. Joseph Lightsey
775 F.3d 170 (Fourth Circuit, 2014)
United States v. Lavabit, LLC.
749 F.3d 276 (Fourth Circuit, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Terry Steele v. Antony Blinken, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/terry-steele-v-antony-blinken-ca4-2024.