Filed: Oct. 29, 2003
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6683 VINCENT DEPAUL MEDLEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus P. A. TERRANGI, Warden; MAXINE PORCHER, T.C. Director; S. CHRIS JONES, Assistant Programs, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Jerome B. Friedman, District Judge. (CA-03-224-2) Submitted: June 18, 2003 Decided: October 29, 2003 Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges. A
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6683 VINCENT DEPAUL MEDLEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus P. A. TERRANGI, Warden; MAXINE PORCHER, T.C. Director; S. CHRIS JONES, Assistant Programs, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Jerome B. Friedman, District Judge. (CA-03-224-2) Submitted: June 18, 2003 Decided: October 29, 2003 Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges. Af..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6683 VINCENT DEPAUL MEDLEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus P. A. TERRANGI, Warden; MAXINE PORCHER, T.C. Director; S. CHRIS JONES, Assistant Programs, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Jerome B. Friedman, District Judge. (CA-03-224-2) Submitted: June 18, 2003 Decided: October 29, 2003 Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Vincent DePaul Medley, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Vincent DePaul Medley appeals the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Medley v. Terrangi, No. CA-03-224-2 (E.D. Va. filed Apr. 17, 2003 & entered Apr. 18, 2003). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2
