U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2023

In re: Metcalf

In re: Metcalf
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided February 16, 2023

In re: Metcalf

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 22-1506 Doc: 5 Filed: 02/16/2023 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 22-1506

RONALD D. METCALF, Parent/advocate, legal guardian as lawful guardian ad litem of Minor Child D. J. M.; CLAUDIA METCALF, Parent/advocate, legal guardian as lawful guardian ad litem of Minor Child D. J. M, Petitioners - Appellants, and In re: D.J.M., Party Below.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Martin K. Reidinger, Chief District Judge. (1:22-mc-00013-MR-WCM)

Submitted: January 31, 2023 Decided: February 16, 2023

Before THACKER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ron David Metcalf, Claudia Metcalf, Appellants Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 22-1506 Doc: 5 Filed: 02/16/2023 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM: Ron and Claudia Metcalf appeal the district court’s orders dismissing their “petition for review of whole record, and for competent attorney to facilitate procedure” without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), imposing a pre-filing review system, and denying their motion to recuse. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. In re Metcalf, No. 1:22-mc-00013-MR-WCM (W.D.N.C. Apr. 5 & 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

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