Skip to main content

STEWART v. 100 100 100 (2018)

Reset A A Font size: Print

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Shirley Ann STEWART, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Eric Himpton. HOLDER, Jr.; Thomas S. Winkowski; Edwin C. Roessler, Fairfax County Police Department; Stacey Kincaid, Fairfax County Sheriff Dept.; Michael L. Chapman; John F. Kerry, U.S. Department of State; Sarah Saldana, Immigration and Customs Enforcement; Stephen Holl, Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority; B. A. Pitts, (Fairfax Sheriff), in his Personal capacity; Jason S. Manyx, (U.S. Homeland Security), in his personal capacity; Doug Comfort, (Fairfax Police), in his personal capacity; United States of America; Jeh Johnson, U.S. Homeland Security, Defendants-Appellees, Ronald C. Machen, Jr.; Alejandro Mayorkas, and Wife; Jason P. Manyx, and Wife; Ivan D. Davis, and Wife; Doe Entities, and others of yet unknown; 1-100; Jane Does 1-100; Doe Corporations 1-100; Doe Governmental; Joe Tsuyi, and Wife; Doug Comfort, and Wife; Dana J. Boente; Theresa Carroll. Buchanan, and Husband; Barack H. Obama, Defendants.

No. 17-1862

Decided: January 30, 2018

Before MOTZ and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Shirley Ann Stewart, Appellant Pro Se. Dennis Carl Barghaan, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia; Juliane Corroon Miller, Debra Schneider Stafford, HUDGINS LAW FIRM, Alexandria, Virginia; Morris Kletzkin, I, Joseph Walter Santini, FRIEDLANDER MISLER, PLLC, Washington, D.C.; Kimberly Pace Baucom, Assistant County Attorney, FAIRFAX COUNTY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, Fairfax, Virginia, for Appellees.

Shirley Ann Stewart appeals the district court's order dismissing her second amended complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's judgment. Stewart v. Holder, No. 1:16-cv-00682-TSE-JFA, 2017 WL 4479612 (E.D. Va. filed July 19, 2017 & entered July 20, 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Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Copied to clipboard