Spriggs v. Citibank (Maryland) ( 1996 )

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-2358 HYRATHA C. SPRIGGS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CITIBANK (MARYLAND), N.A., Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, Chief District Judge. (CA-91-3546-JFM) Submitted: December 12, 1996 Decided: December 18, 1996 Before MURNAGHAN, NIEMEYER, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Hyratha C. Spriggs, Appellant Pro Se. Jana Howard Carey, Todd James Horn, VENABLE, BAETJER & HOWARD, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Hyratha C. Spriggs appeals the district court's orders assess- ing costs against Spriggs following her unsuccessful employment discrimination suit against the Defendant, and denying her motion to rescind the court's order assessing costs.* We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Spriggs v. Citibank (Maryland), N.A., No. CA-91-3546-JFM (D. Md. June 20 & Aug. 6, 1996). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the ma- terials before the Court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED * The order assessing costs against Spriggs was entered May 20, 1996. Spriggs' motion for extension of time to respond to the order was not filed until June 10, 1996. In that motion, Spriggs claims that she failed to receive notice of the order because it was sent to her attorney, whom she previously had discharged. The district court reopened the case and granted Spriggs several extensions of time before denying the motion. 2