In re: Beckie Boddie

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 26-1130
In Re: BECKIE BODDIE,
Movant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.
Paula Xinis, District Judge. (1:18-cv-03309-PX)
Submitted: March 31, 2026 Decided: April 9, 2026
Before WILKINSON, KING, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed in part and dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Beckie R. Boddie, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 3 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Beckie Boddie appeals the district court’s letter order striking her Fed. R. Civ. P.
60(b)(4) motion because she was not a party to the action in which her motion was filed.*
Boddie complains that the district court denied her right to be heard, and she seeks to
challenge the court’s orders establishing a redress plan for fraud victims.
We construe Boddie’s motion as a request to intervene in the district court
proceedings. We discern no abuse of discretion in the court’s refusal to allow Boddie to
intervene. See Gould v. Alleco, Inc., 883 F.2d 281, 284 (4th Cir. 1989) (providing standard
of review).
As for Boddie’s challenge to the redress plan, “[g]enerally, nonparties to
proceedings in the district court may not appeal from a district court’s judgment.” Sky
Cable, LLC v. DIRECTV, Inc., 886 F.3d 375, 384 (4th Cir. 2018). “A limited exception
arises if a nonparty has an interest in the litigation and actively participated in the particular
stage of district court proceedings that is challenged on appeal.” Id.; see Doe v. Pub.
Citizen, 749 F.3d 246, 259 (4th Cir. 2014) (describing exception as “nonparty appellate
standing”). Here, Boddie did not actively participate in the district court proceedings, so
she lacks nonparty appellate standing.
Accordingly, we affirm the denial of Boddie’s request to intervene, and we dismiss
the remainder of the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
* Boddie has filed motions for a stay, for injunction pending appeal, to supplement
the record, and to address delay in the transmittal of the record. We deny each motion.

-- 2 of 3 --

3
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED IN PART,
DISMISSED IN PART

-- 3 of 3 --