Opinion
22-1687
11-22-2022
TIGRESS SYDNEY ACUTE MCDANIEL, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CHARLOTTE MECKLENBURG BLACK POLITICAL CAUCUS OF CHARLOTTE; MEKO CHOSEN; DOES, Defendants - Appellees.
Tigress Sydney Acute McDaniel, Appellant Pro Se. Morris Fonville McAdoo, MCADOO LORICK, PLLC, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellees.
UNPUBLISHED
Submitted: November 17, 2022
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Max O. Cogburn, Jr., District Judge. (3:22-cv-00236-MOC-DSC)
Tigress Sydney Acute McDaniel, Appellant Pro Se.
Morris Fonville McAdoo, MCADOO LORICK, PLLC, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Before KING, QUATTLEBAUM, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM.
Tigress Sydney Acute McDaniel appeals the district court's order granting McDaniel's request to proceed in forma pauperis, reviewing her civil complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), and dismissing the complaint for want of subject matter jurisdiction. Questions concerning subject matter jurisdiction may be raised at any time by the parties or sua sponte by the court. Brickwood Contractors, Inc. v. Datanet Eng'g, Inc., 369 F.3d 385, 390 (4th Cir. 2004). We review questions of subject matter jurisdiction de novo. Rich v. United States, 811 F.3d 140, 144 (4th Cir. 2015) (providing standard of review).
Upon review, we discern no error in the district court's conclusion that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over McDaniel's complaint. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's dismissal order.[*] McDaniel v. Charlotte Mecklenburg Black Pol. Caucus of Charlotte, No. 3:22-cv-00236-MOC-DSC (W.D. N.C. June 22, 2022). 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.
[*] In response to the arguments advanced in McDaniel's informal brief, we observe that (a) because the district court dismissed without prejudice, McDaniel may amend and refile her complaint to add whatever claims she believes would restore the court's jurisdiction; and (b) our review of the record revealed no basis on which to question Judge Cogburn's impartiality in this matter.