The opinion
USCA4 Appeal: 24-1596 Doc: 5 Filed: 11/21/2024 Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 24-1596
SAMUEL T. WHATLEY, II,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
CHARLESTON COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS; SOUTH CAROLINA
ELECTION COMMISSION; SOUTH CAROLINA ETHICS COMMISSION,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
Charleston. Richard Mark Gergel, District Judge. (2:23-cv-00833-RMG)
Submitted: November 19, 2024 Decided: November 21, 2024
Before QUATTLEBAUM, RUSHING, and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Samuel T. Whatley, II, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 24-1596 Doc: 5 Filed: 11/21/2024 Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Samuel T. Whatley, II, appeals the district court’s order accepting the
recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing without prejudice Whatley’s civil
complaint for lack of standing and lack of subject matter jurisdiction. * We have reviewed
the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s
judgment. Whatley v. Charleston Cnty. Bd. of Elections, No. 2:23-cv-00833-RMG (D.S.C.
June 13, 2024). 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
*
The district court’s order is a final, appealable order because the court did not grant
Whatley leave to amend his complaint. Britt v. DeJoy, 45 F.4th 790, 796 (4th Cir. 2022)
(en banc) (order).
2