Dora L. Adkins v. the Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company, LLC

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 23-2024
DORA L. ADKINS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
THE RITZ-CARLTON HOTEL COMPANY, LLC,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge, and William Edward Fitzpatrick,
Magistrate Judge. (1:22-cv-00934-CMH-WEF)
Submitted: November 21, 2023 Decided: November 28, 2023
Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit
Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Dora L. Adkins, Appellant Pro Se. William Webster Miller, MCGAVIN, BOYCE,
BARDOT, THORSEN & KATZ, P.C., Fairfax, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Dora L. Adkins appeals the district court’s September 25, 2023, order dismissing
her proposed complaint and amended complaint, September 7, 2023, order denying her
motion for leave to seal, and July 11, 2023, order directing that she obtain a default from
the clerk pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a) and file a notice setting a hearing. Adkins also
appeals the magistrate judge’s September 11, 2023, order striking her notice and letter,
August 14, 2023, order denying her motion for default judgment and granting Defendant’s
motion to set aside entry of default, and August 29, 2023, order denying her motion for
reconsideration of the August 14 order. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we grant Adkins’ motions to supplement her informal brief and for
leave to file an informal reply brief, grant her motion and her amended motion to withdraw
her supplemental informal brief, and affirm the district court’s and magistrate judge’s
orders. Adkins v. Ritz-Carlton Hotel Co., LLC, No. 1:22-cv-00934-CMH-WEF (E.D. Va.
July 11, Aug. 14, Aug. 29, Sept. 7, Sept. 11 & Sept. 25, 2023). We deny Adkins’ motions
to reverse and remand and 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 of 2 --