Filed: Feb. 23, 2006
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-7834 MARLON CANADY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MICHAEL POWERS, Captain, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge. (CA-05-616-REP) Submitted: February 16, 2006 Decided: February 23, 2006 Before MICHAEL and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Marlon
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-7834 MARLON CANADY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MICHAEL POWERS, Captain, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge. (CA-05-616-REP) Submitted: February 16, 2006 Decided: February 23, 2006 Before MICHAEL and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Marlon ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-7834 MARLON CANADY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MICHAEL POWERS, Captain, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge. (CA-05-616-REP) Submitted: February 16, 2006 Decided: February 23, 2006 Before MICHAEL and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Marlon Canady, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Marlon Canady appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint without prejudice for failure to comply with the court’s previous order to complete and return a form entitled “Consent to Collection of Fees.” We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Canady v. Powers, No. CA-05-616-REP (E.D. Va. Nov. 3, 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 -
