WRIGHT v. BEARDEN, 12-7995. (2013)
Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Number: infco20130402122
Visitors: 6
Filed: Apr. 02, 2013
Latest Update: Apr. 02, 2013
Summary: Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Allen Wright appeals the district court's orders accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (2006) complaint, denying his motion for extension of time to file a notice of appeal, and denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motions. Limiting our review to the issues raised in the informal brief, see 4th Cir. R. 34(b), we affirm the district cour
Summary: Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Allen Wright appeals the district court's orders accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (2006) complaint, denying his motion for extension of time to file a notice of appeal, and denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motions. Limiting our review to the issues raised in the informal brief, see 4th Cir. R. 34(b), we affirm the district court..
More
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Allen Wright appeals the district court's orders accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint, denying his motion for extension of time to file a notice of appeal, and denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motions. Limiting our review to the issues raised in the informal brief, see 4th Cir. R. 34(b), we affirm the district court's orders. Wright v. Bearden, No. 1:11-cv-03307-TLW (D.S.C. Oct. 2, 2012; dated Nov. 2, 2012, entered Nov. 5, 2012). 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.
AFFIRMED.
Source: Leagle
