Opm
Marilyn Tillman-Conerly v. Opm
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 23, 202423-16120California316 words
Opinion
Opinion
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS SEP 23 2024
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MARILYN TILLMAN-CONERLY, No. 23-16120
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:22-cv-01617-DAD-AC
v.
MEMORANDUM*
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL
MANAGEMENT; LAVERNE WATSON,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Dale A. Drozd, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 17, 2024**
Before: WARDLAW, BADE, and H.A. THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
Marilyn Tillman-Conerly appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment
dismissing her action concerning her federal retirement benefits. We have
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1). Davidson v. Kimberly-Clark Corp., 889 F.3d
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 956, 963 (9th Cir.…