Opm

Marilyn Tillman-Conerly v. Opm

Good Law
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NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED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.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.