U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 1997

Wright v. Reno

Wright v. Reno
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided September 10, 1997

Wright v. Reno

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-1575

SAM WRIGHT, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus

JANET RENO, Attorney General of the United States, in her official capacity, Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, District Judge. (CA-97-312-A)

Submitted: August 28, 1997 Decided: September 10, 1997

Before WILKINS, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Sam Wright, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Richard Parker, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court’s order dismissing his civil action in which he sought injunctive relief. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error in the district court's conclusion that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction. Appellant's suit against the Attorney General in her official capacity is, in effect, a suit against the United States. See Hawaii v. Gordon, 373 U.S. 57, 58 (1963). The United States, however, is immune from suit, unless there has been an express and unequivocal waiver of sovereign immunity. See Army & Air Force Exch. Serv. v. Sheehan, 456 U.S. 728, 734 (1982). Because Appellant failed to establish that the United States waived sovereign immunity, we affirm. 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.

AFFIRMED

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.