Larry Murphy v. F.H. Furr

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit December 22, 2025

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 25-1981 Doc: 14 Filed: 12/22/2025 Pg: 1 of 2

No. 25-1981

Plaintiff - Appellant,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Lydia Kay Griggsby, District Judge. (8:25-cv-00613-LKG)

Submitted: December 18, 2025 Decided: December 22, 2025

Before NIEMEYER and BERNER, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Larry W. Murphy, Appellant Pro Se. Darryl G. McCallum, OGLETREE DEAKINS, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 25-1981 Doc: 14 Filed: 12/22/2025 Pg: 2 of 2

Larry W. Murphy appeals the district court’s order (1) granting Defendants’ motion

to dismiss Murphy’s civil complaint in the underlying action; and (2) denying as moot

Murphy’s motions to compel discovery, to strike, and for summary judgment. We have

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. See Moore v. Frazier,

(4th Cir. 2019) (reiterating that this court may affirm a district court’s “decision to dismiss

the complaint on any ground apparent on the record”); see also 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(1)

(requiring a plaintiff bringing a claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42

U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17, to file suit within 90 days of receiving notice of the right to

sue); Francis v. Giacomelli,

(4th Cir. 2009) (explaining that, to survive

a motion to dismiss, “naked assertions of wrongdoing necessitate some factual

enhancement within the complaint to cross the line between possibility and plausibility of

entitlement to relief” (internal quotation marks omitted)). Accordingly, we affirm the

district court’s order. 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.