Opinion

Calvin Brown v. Sears Holding Management Corp

Court
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Filed
May 20, 2016
Status
Unpublished
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 43.5%

noting review standard for Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) denial

How later courts described this case

  • noting review standard for Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) denial

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-1212

CALVIN EARL BROWN,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

SEARS HOLDING MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, d/b/a Kmart

Corporation #7080; THOMAS M. COLCLOUGH, Director US EEOC,

Raleigh Area Office; STEVE DOOLEY; RAJENONAKYMAR PATEL;

JAYESH PATEL,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of North Carolina, at Greenville. James C. Dever, III,

Chief District Judge. (4:14-cv-00033-D)

Submitted: May 18, 2016 Decided: May 20, 2016

Before SHEDD, DIAZ, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Calvin Earl Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Paul S. Holscher, JACKSON

LEWIS PC, Raleigh, North Carolina, David A. Hughes, JACKSON

LEWIS PC, Atlanta, Georgia; Roberto Francisco Ramirez, Assistant

United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Calvin Earl Brown appeals the district court’s order

denying his second motion to reconsider the court’s earlier

order denying his civil action alleging employment

discrimination. We have reviewed the record and find no abuse

of discretion by the district court. See Werner v. Carbo, 731

F.2d 204, 206 (4th Cir. 1984) (noting review standard for Fed.

R. Civ. P. 60(b) denial). * Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed

in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal. 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.

DISMISSED

* Because Brown’s motion to reconsider was filed greater

than 28 days after the district court’s order dismissing his

civil action, the district court’s review was under Fed. R. Civ.

P. 60(b). See Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e).

2

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.