Filed: May 18, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6011 EDUARD LORENZ, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus GENE M. JOHNSON, Deputy Director of Operations, Virginia Department of Corrections; DIRECTOR, General Services Department, Office of Risk Management, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (CA-03-626-AM) Submitted: May 13, 2004 Decided: May 18, 2004 Be
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6011 EDUARD LORENZ, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus GENE M. JOHNSON, Deputy Director of Operations, Virginia Department of Corrections; DIRECTOR, General Services Department, Office of Risk Management, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (CA-03-626-AM) Submitted: May 13, 2004 Decided: May 18, 2004 Bef..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6011 EDUARD LORENZ, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus GENE M. JOHNSON, Deputy Director of Operations, Virginia Department of Corrections; DIRECTOR, General Services Department, Office of Risk Management, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (CA-03-626-AM) Submitted: May 13, 2004 Decided: May 18, 2004 Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Eduard Lorenz, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Eduard Lorenz appeals the district court’s order denying relief on 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 Lorenz v. Johnson, No. CA-03-626-AM (E.D. Va, filed Nov. 21, 2003; entered Nov. 22, 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 -
