Chinyere UZOUKWU, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. PRINCE GEORGE'S COMMUNITY COLLEGE (PGCC) BOARD OF TRUSTEES, by and through Felix YEOMAN, Chair; Prince George's Community College (PGCC), by and through Dr. Charlene Dukes, President; Andristine M. Robinson, in her personal capacity and the function of Director of Student Services Operations, Prince George's Community College (PGCC); Tyjuan A. Lee, Ph.D, in her personal capacity and the function of Vice President for Student Services, Prince George's Community College (PGCC); Muriel Adams, in her personal capacity and the function of Associate Professor and Program Director, HIM, Prince George's Community College (PGCC); Pamela Caesar, in her personal capacity and the function of Associate Professor, HIM, Prince George's Community College (PGCC); Patrick Adeywumi, in his personal capacity and the function of Office Assistant/Computer Technician-LCC, Prince George's Community College at Laurel College Center (LLC); Lavonda Elliott, in her personal capacity and the function of Student, Sibley Memorial Hospital; Margarette Kellner, in her personal capacity and the function of Student; Felice Smith, in her personal capacity and the function of Student; UNiversity Of Maryland At College Park Police (UMD-CP), by and through Wallace D. Loh, President; University of Maryland at College Park Police, by and through Chief J. Killion; Calvin L. Smith, Sr.; Harold J. Gist, Ph.D, in his personal capacity and as officer/representative, The Lancer Group; Rodney Byrd, in his personal capacity and as officer/representative, Creative Investments; Amex International, Incorporated, by and through its officers/representatives, Mamadi Diane, President and Mori Diane, Vice President, Defendants-Appellees, 623 F. App'x 604

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Chinyere Uzoukwu appeals the district court’s order denying her postjudgment motion for leave to file an amended complaint. We review a district court’s denial of a motion to amend a complaint for an abuse of discretion, Laber v. Harvey, 438 F.3d 404, 428 (4th Cir.2006) (en banc). We have reviewed the record and conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. Uzoukwu, v. Prince George’s Cmty. Coll.

Bd. of Trs., No. 8:12-cv-02199-JFM (D.Md. June 10, 2015). 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.