Ken Gryder v. Freddie Mac, No. 22-1570 (4th Cir. 2022)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 22-1570 KEN GRYDER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. FREDDIE MAC, Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation; FREDDIE MAC BOARD OF DIRECTORS; GREG WATCHMAN; JACQUI WELCH; ELISE COCKS; JONMICHAEL MONHEIM; JUSTIN THIVENER; FAUD CHAUDRY; THE WASHINGTON DC OFFICE OF THE EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION; LEATHA JOHNSON; MINDY WEINSTEIN, Director of the Washington DC EEOC, Defendants - Appellees. No. 22-1767 KEN GRYDER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. FREDDIE MAC, Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation; FREDDIE MAC BOARD OF DIRECTORS; GREG WATCHMAN; JACQUI WELCH; ELISE COCKS; JONMICHAEL MONHEIM; JUSTIN THIVENER; FAUD CHAUDRY; THE WASHINGTON DC OFFICE OF THE EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION; LEATHA JOHNSON; MINDY WEINSTEIN, Director of the Washington DC EEOC, Defendants - Appellees. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Liam O’Grady, Senior District Judge. (1:21-cv-01380-LO-TCB) Submitted: November 17, 2022 Decided: November 22, 2022 Before KING, QUATTLEBAUM, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ken Gryder, Appellant Pro Se. Jocelyn Renee Cuttino, MORGAN LEWIS & BOCKIUS, LLP, Washington, D.C., for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: In these consolidated cases, Ken Gryder appeals (1) the district court’s order granting Defendants’ motion to dismiss Gryder’s complaint raising numerous civil claims; and (2) the magistrate judge’s order denying Gryder’s motion to amend his complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment in Defendants’ favor. See Gryder v. Freddie Mac, No. 1:21-cv-01380LO-TCB (E.D. Va. June 29, 2022). 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.