Libby A. Demery v. JOHN M. MCHUGH, Secretary of the Army

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-2347
LIBBY A. DEMERY,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
JOHN M. MCHUGH, Secretary of the Army,
Defendant – Appellee,
and
KATHERINE ARCHULETA,
Defendant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. Paul W. Grimm, District Judge. (8:13-
cv-02389-PWG)
Submitted: March 17, 2016 Decided: March 21, 2016
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Libby A. Demery, Appellant Pro Se. Alex Gordon, Assistant
United States Attorney, Greenbelt, Maryland, Allen F. Loucks,
Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for
Appellee.

-- 1 of 4 --

2
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 2 of 4 --

3
PER CURIAM:
Libby Demery appeals the district court’s letter order
denying her motions for Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(d)(3) relief and for
recusal of the presiding district judge.* On appeal, we confine
our review to the issues raised in Demery’s informal briefs.
See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). We have reviewed the record in light of
Demery’s arguments and find no reversible error in the district
court’s conclusion that Demery did not allege fraud on the court
warranting postjudgment relief under Rule 60(d)(3).
Accordingly, we affirm substantially for the reasons stated by
the district court. Demery v. McHugh, No. 8:13-cv-02389-PWG
(D. Md. filed Oct. 23, 2015 & entered Oct. 26, 2015). We deny
Demery’s motion requesting oral argument because the facts and
* Demery’s informal briefs also address the court’s
underlying judgment dismissing her claims of unlawful
discrimination, retaliation, and veterans’ preference violations
in hiring, and its denial of Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) relief.
Because Demery did not timely appeal those orders, they are not
properly before us. See Fed. R. App. P. 3(c)(1)(B), 4(a)(1)(B),
(4)(A)(iv); Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 175-77 (4th Cir.
2014). Further, insofar as Demery seeks appellate review of a
sanctions request filed with the Department of Justice, such
proceedings are not within this court’s jurisdiction.

-- 3 of 4 --

4
legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
before this court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED

-- 4 of 4 --