Opinion

Jerome Brown v. Thor Smith

Court
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Filed
Jan 18, 2022
Status
Unpublished
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 5.0%

The opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21-1688

JEROME BROWN,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

THOR SMITH; LAURA RACKEY; SHARON CECIL; FREDRIC EINHORN,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt.

Theodore D. Chuang, District Judge. (8:21-cv-01178-TDC)

Submitted: January 7, 2022 Decided: January 18, 2022

Before NIEMEYER and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jerome Julius Brown, Sr., Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Jerome Brown appeals the district court’s orders requiring him to show cause why

the court had subject matter jurisdiction over this civil case and dismissing the 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. See Brown v.

Smith, No. 8:21-cv-01178-TDC (D. Md. June 3, 2021; May 14, 2021); see also Fed. R.

Civ. P. 12(h)(3); Arbaugh v. Y&H Corp., 546 U.S. 500, 514 (2006); United States ex rel.

Carson v. Manor Care, Inc., 851 F.3d 293, 303 (4th Cir. 2017). 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

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.