Opinion of the Court — Gardner v. Central Intelligence Agency

This writing

Type: Opinion of the Court
Per curiam: Yes — no individual author
Filed: Nov. 22, 2011
Case: Gardner v. Central Intelligence Agency
Case status: Decided

Source The opinion is per curiam: issued in the name of the court, with no individual author. This is a fact about the opinion, not missing data.

Opening text

The first passage of the document, as extracted by the source provider.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Lael Gardner appeals the district court’s order dismissing her complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Gardner v. Cent. Intelligence Agency, No. 1:11-cv-01126-BEL (D.Md. May 12, 2011). 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.…

Source Extract supplied by CourtListener. Benchlight does not host the document — read the authoritative text in the court's own PDF.