Toccara Puller v. Lieutenant Quarles

USCA4 Appeal: 24-7168 Doc: 11 Filed: 04/14/2025 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 24-7168 TOCCARA YVONNE PULLER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. LIEUTENANT QUARLES; SERGEANT STONE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James P. Jones, Senior District Judge. (7:24-cv-00696-JPJ-PMS) Submitted: February 28, 2025 Decided: April 14, 2025 Before NIEMEYER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge. Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion. Toccara Yvonne Puller, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 24-7168 Doc: 11 Filed: 04/14/2025 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Toccarra Yvonne Puller appeals the district court’s order dismissing her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action without prejudice for failure to comply with the court’s order directing her to submit a statement of assets and a prisoner trust account report for the six-month period immediately proceeding the filing of the complaint.∗ Puller filed the requested documents shortly after the deadline for filing, and one of the documents, the Statement of Assets, was dated and signed under penalty of perjury before the deadline passed. Puller contends that prison administrative delays prevented her from timely complying with the order. Her subsequent objections to the district court’s dismissal order were filed within 28 days after entry of the district court’s judgment. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e). Because the district court should have construed Puller’s filings as a Rule 59(e) motion to alter or amend a judgment, see Castro v. United States, 540 U.S. 375, 381 (2003), we vacate the judgment and remand for the district court to consider the motion and documents in the first instance. We express no opinion on the ultimate disposition of Puller’s claims. 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 in the decisional process. VACATED AND REMANDED ∗ As the district court did not provide leave to amend, the order is final. See Britt v. DeJoy, 45 F.4th 790, 796 (4th Cir. 2022) (en banc) (order). 2