Hadarou Sare v. Christina Nikiforidou

USCA4 Appeal: 25-1888 Doc: 28 Filed: 02/23/2026 Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 25-1888

HADAROU SARE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CHRISTINA NIKIFORIDOU, in her official capacity at the University of Maryland College Park and under her individual capacity; CHENCHEN HANDLER, in her official capacity at the University of Maryland College Park and under her individual capacity; MARUKO KOGURE, in her official capacity at the University of Maryland College Park and under her individual capacity; DAN SCHORR, in his official capacity at the University of Maryland College Park and under his individual capacity; HOSOM FATHY, in her official capacity at the University of Maryland College Park and under her individual capacity; UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND AT COLLEGE PARK, Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.

Julie R. Rubin, District Judge. (1:23-cv-02675-JRR)

Submitted: February 19, 2026 Decided: February 23, 2026

Before WYNN and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

USCA4 Appeal: 25-1888 Doc: 28 Filed: 02/23/2026 Pg: 2 of 3

Hadarou Sare, Appellant Pro Se. Kathryn Joyce Bradley, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland; Megan Marie Jenkins, ECCLESTON & WOLF, PC, Hanover, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 25-1888 Doc: 28 Filed: 02/23/2026 Pg: 3 of 3

PER CURIAM: Hadarou Sare appeals numerous district court’s orders entered in the underlying action, including the court’s order (1) dismissing several Defendants based on Sare’s failure to effect service of process; and (2) granting the two remaining Defendants’ motion to dismiss Sare’s amended complaint. * On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). We have reviewed the record in conjunction with the issues raised in Sare’s informal brief and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s final order dismissing Sare’s amended complaint without prejudice. Sare v. Nikiforidou, No. 1:23-cv-02675-JRR (D. Md. July 29, 2025). 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

* Sare has filed motions seeking relief against most of the individual Defendants, which we deny.