From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Greene v. Department of Labor

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Nov 15, 2011
No. 11-1550 (4th Cir. Nov. 15, 2011)

Opinion

No. 11-1550

11-15-2011

CHELSEA ELIZABETH GREENE, Petitioner, v. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Administrative Review Board, Respondent.

Chelsea Elizabeth Greene, Petitioner Pro Se. Benjamin Richard Botts, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.


UNPUBLISHED

On Petition for Review of an Order of the United States Department of Labor. (09-109)

Before AGEE, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Chelsea Elizabeth Greene, Petitioner Pro Se. Benjamin Richard Botts, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Chelsea Elizabeth Greene seeks review of the Administrative Review Board's final decision and order affirming the administrative law judge's dismissal of her whistleblower action under the Corporate and Criminal Fraud Accountability Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C.A. § 1514A (West 2006 & Supp. 2011), and the Board's order denying reconsideration. Our review of the record discloses that the Board's final decision is based upon substantial evidence and that the orders are without reversible error. Accordingly, we deny the petition for review for the reasons stated by the Board. Greene v. Omni Visions, Inc., No. 09-109. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED


Summaries of

Greene v. Department of Labor

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Nov 15, 2011
No. 11-1550 (4th Cir. Nov. 15, 2011)
Case details for

Greene v. Department of Labor

Case Details

Full title:CHELSEA ELIZABETH GREENE, Petitioner, v. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Date published: Nov 15, 2011

Citations

No. 11-1550 (4th Cir. Nov. 15, 2011)