History
  • No items yet
midpage
Clotilde Jimenez v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
16-1926
| 4th Cir. | Mar 9, 2017
|
Check Treatment
|
Docket

*1 Before THACKER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Clotilde C. Jimenez, Appellant Pro Se. Brian Montgomery Barnwell, Matthew Douglas Patterson, NELSON MULLINS RILEY & SCARBOROUGH, LLP, Columbia, South Carolina, Nathan Ira Brown, NELSON MULLINS RILEY & SCARBOROUGH, LLP, Huntington, West Virginia, Sarah Reimers McIntee, NELSON MULLINS RILEY & SCARBOROUGH, LLP, Washington, D.C., for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. *2 PER CURIAM:

Clotilde C. Jimenez appeals the district court’s order granting Defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Jimenez v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., No. 1:16-cv-00624-CMH-MSN (E.D. Va. filed July 26, 2016; entered July 27, 2016). We grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis. 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

Case Details

Case Name: Clotilde Jimenez v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
Court Name: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Date Published: Mar 9, 2017
Docket Number: 16-1926
Court Abbreviation: 4th Cir.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.