Martha Hoelzer, and all similarly situated individuals v. Board of Governors of the University of North Carolina

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 23-1391
MARTHA HOELZER, and all similarly situated individuals,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA;
THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL; RAYMOND
FARROW, in his individual and official capacity; BARBARA J. STEPHENSON, in
her individual and official capacity; DANIEL LEBOLD, in his individual and
official capacity; DAVID ROUTH, in his individual and official capacity; DEBBIE
DIBBERT, in her individual and official capacity,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at
Greensboro. Loretta C. Biggs, District Judge. (1:20-cv-01072-LCB-LPA)
Submitted: February 20, 2024 Decided: April 25, 2024
Before KING and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
ON BRIEF: Valerie L. Bateman, Carborro, North Carolina, June K. Allison, NEW
SOUTH LAW FIRM, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Joshua H. Stein, Attorney
General, Ryan Y. Park, Solicitor General, Lindsay Vance Smith, Deputy Solicitor General,
Nicholas S. Brod, Deputy Solicitor General, Jeremy Lindsley, Assistant Attorney General,

-- 1 of 3 --

2
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 2 of 3 --

3
PER CURIAM:
Martha Hoelzer appeals the district court orders (1) granting Defendants’ motion to
dismiss Hoelzer’s discrimination and retaliation claims, brought pursuant to the Americans
with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101 to 12213; retaliation claim, brought pursuant to
the Family and Medical Leave Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 2601 to 2654; and claims alleging
Defendants violated her due process rights in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and denying
Hoelzer’s motion for leave to amend the amended complaint; and (2) granting Daniel
Lebold’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(c) motion for judgment on the pleadings on Hoelzer’s § 1983
claim against him. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,
we affirm the district court’s judgment. Hoelzer v. Bd. of Governors of the Univ. of N.C.,
No. 1:20-cv-01072-LCB-LPA (M.D.N.C. Mar. 13, 2023). 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

-- 3 of 3 --