Opinion
21-1092
07-22-2021
MARIE THERESE ASSA'AD-FALTAS, MD, MPH, for herself and classes she represents, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. HENRY DARGAN MCMASTER, South Carolina's Governor; and any and all of their necessary agents; each solely in his official capacity and solely for prospective relief; ALAN M. WILSON, SC Attorney General; and any and all of their necessary agents; each solely in his official capacity and solely for prospective relief; JAY LUCAS, or his successor, SC House Speaker; and any and all of their necessary agents; each solely in his official capacity and solely for prospective relief; DONALD W. BEATTY, SC Chief Justice; and any and all of their necessary agents; each solely in his official capacity and solely for prospective relief, Defendants - Appellees.
Marie Therese Assa'ad-Faltas, Appellant Pro Se.
UNPUBLISHED
Submitted: July 20, 2021
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Terry L. Wooten, Senior District Judge. (3:20-cv-01809-TLW)
Marie Therese Assa'ad-Faltas, Appellant Pro Se.
Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Marie Therese Assa'ad-Faltas appeals the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing without prejudice, after a review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, Assa'ad-Faltas' 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action.[*] We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Assa'ad-Faltas v. McMaster, No. 3:20-cv-01809-TLW (D.S.C. Dec. 18, 2020). We deny Assa'ad-Faltas' motion to place this appeal in abeyance. 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 [*] Although the district court dismissed Assa'ad-Faltas' action without prejudice, we have jurisdiction over this appeal. See Bing v. Brivo Sys., LLC, 959 F.3d 605, 612 (4th Cir. 2020), cert. denied, 141 S.Ct. 1376 (2021).