Filed: Nov. 30, 2005
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-7399 EUGENE THOMAS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus STATE OF VIRGINIA, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (CA-05-429-7) Submitted: November 17, 2005 Decided: November 30, 2005 Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Eugene Thomas, Appellant Pro S
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-7399 EUGENE THOMAS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus STATE OF VIRGINIA, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (CA-05-429-7) Submitted: November 17, 2005 Decided: November 30, 2005 Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Eugene Thomas, Appellant Pro Se..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-7399 EUGENE THOMAS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus STATE OF VIRGINIA, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (CA-05-429-7) Submitted: November 17, 2005 Decided: November 30, 2005 Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Eugene Thomas, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Eugene Thomas appeals the district court’s order dismissing his § 1983 action for failure to state a claim. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Thomas v. Virginia, No. CA-05-429-7 (W.D. Va. July 27, 2005). 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 -
