Alice Guan v. Gary Bell, No. 21-2397 (4th Cir. 2022)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 21-2397 ALICE GUAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. GARY BELL; SERGEY KATSENELENBOGEN; JEN KIM; JAMES C. CLARK, as an individual and in his capacity as the Judge for Alexandria Circuit Court the 18th Judicial Circuit of Virginia; DONALD W. LEMONS, as an individual, and as the Chief Justice for the Supreme Court of Virginia; S. BERNARD GOODWYN, as an individual, and as the Justice for the Supreme Court of Virginia; WILLIAM C. MIMS, as an individual, and as the Justice for the Supreme Court of Virginia; CLEO E. POWELL, as an individual, and as the Justice for the Supreme Court of Virginia; STEPHEN R. MCCULLOUGH, as an individual, and as the Justice for the Supreme Court of Virginia; CHARLES S. RUSSELL, as an individual, and as the Senior Justice for the Supreme Court of Virginia; LAWRENCE L. KOONTZ, JR., as an individual, and as the Senior Justice of the Supreme Court of Virginia; LEROY F. MILLETTE, JR., as an individual, and as the Senior Justice for the Supreme Court of Virginia; THE ALEXANDRIA CIRCUIT COURT, the 18th Judicial Circuit of Virginia; THE SUPREME COURT OF VIRGINIA, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Liam O’Grady, Senior District Judge. (1:21-cv-00752-LO-TCB) Submitted: May 24, 2022 Decided: May 26, 2022 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Alice Guan, Appellant Pro Se. James Bennett Kinsel, PROTORAE LAW PLLC, Tysons, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Alice Guan appeals the district court’s order granting Defendants’ motions to dismiss Guan’s civil claims against them. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. See Guan v. Bell, No. 1:21-cv-00752-LO-TCB (E.D. Va. filed Nov. 30, 2021 & entered Dec. 1, 2021). We grant Guan’s motion seeking to exceed the length limitations for her informal brief and deny as moot the remaining pending motions. 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. AFFIRMED 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
