GABRIEL v. FRYE LLC LP (2020)

Charles Gabriel appeals the district court's orders dismissing his civil action and denying his motion to file an amended complaint. To the extent Gabriel sought to challenge the result of a state foreclosure action, the district court concluded that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to the Rooker-Feldman ^* doctrine. The court further concluded that Gabriel's claims that survived Rooker-Feldman failed to state a plausible claim for relief and that amendment would be futile because Gabriel's amended complaint similarly failed to state a plausible claim for relief. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we grant Gabriel's motion to proceed in forma pauperis, and we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Gabriel v. Frye, No. 1:18-cv-00354-TDS-LPA (M.D.N.C. Jan. 8, 2019 & May 21, 2019). 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

FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTE.   D.C. Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462, 103 S.Ct. 1303, 75 L.Ed.2d 206 (1983); Rooker v. Fid. Tr. Co., 263 U.S. 413, 44 S.Ct. 149, 68 L.Ed. 362 (1923).

PER CURIAM:

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.