Pakuja Crystal Vang v. Valdese Weaver
Summary
The Fourth Circuit affirmed the Western District of North Carolina's dismissal of Pakuja Crystal Vang's pro se civil action as frivolous. The appellate court, in an unpublished per curiam decision, found no reversible error under the standard of review articulated in Nagy v. FMC Butner, 376 F.3d 252. The Solicitor General of the United States was among the named appellees. The decision was filed on April 23, 2026.
“Pakuja Crystal Vang appeals the district court's order dismissing her pro se civil action as frivolous.”
About this source
GovPing monitors 4th Circuit Opinions for new courts & legal regulatory changes. Every update since tracking began is archived, classified, and available as free RSS or email alerts — 7 changes logged to date.
What changed
The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of Pakuja Crystal Vang's civil action as frivolous, applying the standard of review from Nagy v. FMC Butner, 376 F.3d 252. The per curiam opinion found no reversible error in the lower court's order. The opinion is unpublished and non-precedential within the Fourth Circuit, limiting its precedential value for future cases.
Pro se litigants and civil rights practitioners should note that frivolousness remains a viable basis for early dismissal in federal courts, and the Fourth Circuit applies a deferential standard of review to such determinations. While this opinion has no binding precedential effect, it underscores the high bar civil plaintiffs must meet to survive dismissal at the pleading stage.
Archived snapshot
Apr 25, 2026GovPing captured this document from the original source. If the source has since changed or been removed, this is the text as it existed at that time.
Jump To
Support FLP
CourtListener is a project of Free
Law Project, a federally-recognized 501(c)(3) non-profit. Members help support our work and get special access to features.
Please become a member today.
April 23, 2026 Get Citation Alerts Download PDF Add Note
Pakuja Vang v. Valdese Weaver
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- Citations: None known
- Docket Number: 25-2240
Precedential Status: Non-Precedential
Combined Opinion
USCA4 Appeal: 25-2240 Doc: 9 Filed: 04/23/2026 Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 25-2240
PAKUJA CRYSTAL VANG
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
VALDESE WEAVER; USA GOVERNMENT; SOLICITOR GENERAL OF THE
UNITED STATES,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at
Asheville. Martin K. Reidinger, Chief District Judge. (1:25-cv-00330-MR-WCM)
Submitted: March 17, 2026 Decided: April 23, 2026
Before WYNN, HARRIS, and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Pakuja Crystal Vang, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 25-2240 Doc: 9 Filed: 04/23/2026 Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Pakuja Crystal Vang appeals the district court’s order dismissing her pro se civil
action as frivolous. We have reviewed the record and discern no reversible error. See
Nagy v. FMC Butner, 376 F.3d 252, 254-55 (4th Cir. 2004) (explaining standard of
review). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. Vang v. Valdese Weaver, No.
1:25-cv-00330-MR-WCM (W.D.N.C. Sept. 29, 2025). 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
2
Parties
Related changes
Get daily alerts for 4th Circuit Opinions
Daily digest delivered to your inbox.
Free. Unsubscribe anytime.
About this page
Every important government, regulator, and court update from around the world. One place. Real-time. Free. Our mission
Source document text, dates, docket IDs, and authority are extracted directly from USCA4.
The summary, classification, recommended actions, deadlines, and penalty information are AI-generated from the original text and may contain errors. Always verify against the source document.
Classification
Who this affects
Taxonomy
Browse Categories
Get alerts for this source
We'll email you when 4th Circuit Opinions publishes new changes.
Subscribed!
Optional. Filters your digest to exactly the updates that matter to you.