Case: 12-20444 Document: 00512419011 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/24/2013
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
October 24, 2013
No. 12-20444
Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
L.F. by next friend of Mary Ruffin,
Plaintiff - Appellant
v.
HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT;
DILLARD, Hearing Officer,
Defendants - Appellees
-------------------------------------------------------------
L.F. by next friend of Mary Ruffin,
Plaintiff - Appellant
v.
LUECRETIA DILLARD, Hearing Officer,
Defendant - Appellee
--------------------------------------------------------------
L.F. by next friend of Mary Ruffin,
Plaintiff - Appellant
v.
HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT;
LUECRETIA DILLARD,
Defendants - Appellees
--------------------------------------------------------------
Case: 12-20444 Document: 00512419011 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/24/2013
No. 12-20444
MARY RUFFIN,
Plaintiff - Appellant
v.
TONYA LEE; TAIEKA DERRICK,
Defendants-Appellees
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:11-CV-903
USDC No. 4:11-CV-1089
USDC No. 4:11-CV-1501
USDC No. 4:11-CV-2395
Before WIENER, OWEN, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Plaintiff-Appellant L. F., by next friend of Mary Ruffin, proceeding pro se
and in forma pauperis, appeals the district court’s dismissal of her Individuals
with Disabilities Education Act complaints that challenged actions by the
Houston Independent School District, Tonya Lee, Taieka Derrick, and Luecretia
Dillard. On appeal, Ruffin has failed to provide any comprehensible legal
arguments that credibly challenge the detailed analyses and conclusions set
forth in the district court’s decisions. Although we apply less stringent standards
to parties proceeding pro se than to those represented by counsel, and we
liberally construe briefs of pro se litigants, such parties must still brief the issues
substantively and reasonably comply with the requirements of Federal Rule of
Appellate Procedure 28. See Grant v. Cuellar, 59 F.3d 523, 524 (5th Cir. 1995).
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
2
Case: 12-20444 Document: 00512419011 Page: 3 Date Filed: 10/24/2013
No. 12-20444
As Ruffin has failed to provide any coherent argument demonstrating reversible
error by the district court, see id.; Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 225 (5th Cir.
1993), we affirm the ruling of the district court.
AFFIRMED.
3