UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-1286
MARIE THERESE ASSA’AD-FALTAS, MD, MPH,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
SOUTH CAROLINA, THE STATE OF,
Respondent – Appellee,
and
COLUMBIA SC, THE CITY OF,
Respondent.
No. 13-1609
MARIE THERESE ASSA’AD-FALTAS, MD, MPH,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
SOUTH CAROLINA, THE STATE OF,
Respondent – Appellee,
and
COLUMBIA SOUTH CAROLINA, CITY OF, hereinafter “the City”,
Respondent.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the District
of South Carolina, at Aiken. Terry L. Wooten, Chief District
Judge. (1:13-cv-00298-TLW; 1:13-cv-00033-TLW)
Submitted: October 17, 2013 Decided: October 21, 2013
Before AGEE, DAVIS, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Marie Therese Assa’ad-Faltas, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
PER CURIAM:
In these consolidated appeals, Marie Therese Assa’ad-
Faltas seeks to appeal the district court’s orders accepting the
recommendations of the magistrate judge and denying relief on
her petitions seeking federal habeas relief. Assa’ad-Faltas has
also filed motions to vacate the court’s consolidation order and
to supplement her informal opening briefs in both appeals, as
well as a motion and a supplemental motion for injunctive relief
pending her appeal in Appeal No. 13-1609.
The district court orders Assa’ad-Faltas seeks to
appeal are not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge
issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. §
2253(c)(1)(A) (2006). A certificate of appealability will not
issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a
constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). When the
district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies
this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would
find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional
claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473,
484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38
(2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural
grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive
procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a
3
debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack,
529 U.S. at 484-85.
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude
that Assa’ad-Faltas has not made the requisite showing.
Accordingly, we deny the pending motions, deny a certificate of
appealability and dismiss the appeals. 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.
DISMISSED
4