Opinion
24-1596
11-21-2024
SAMUEL T. WHATLEY, II, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CHARLESTON COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS; SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTION COMMISSION; SOUTH CAROLINA ETHICS COMMISSION, Defendants - Appellees.
Samuel T. Whatley, II, Appellant Pro Se.
UNPUBLISHED
Submitted: November 19, 2024
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston (2:23-cv-00833-RMG), Richard Mark Gergel, District Judge.
Samuel T. Whatley, II, Appellant Pro Se.
Before QUATTLEBAUM, RUSHING, and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Samuel T. Whatley, II, appeals the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing without prejudice Whatley's civil complaint for lack of standing and lack of subject matter jurisdiction.[*] We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's judgment. Whatley v. Charleston Cnty. Bd. of Elections, No. 2:23-cv-00833-RMG (D.S.C. June 13, 2024). 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
[*] The district court's order is a final, appealable order because the court did not grant Whatley leave to amend his complaint. Britt v. DeJoy, 45 F.4th 790, 796 (4th Cir. 2022) (en banc) (order).