Filed: Jul. 03, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6540 MICHAEL ALLEN KOKOSKI, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CHARLES FELTS, Warden, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Beckley. Robert C. Chambers, District Judge. (5:06-cv-00024) Submitted: June 8, 2007 Decided: July 3, 2007 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael Allen Kokoski, Appella
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6540 MICHAEL ALLEN KOKOSKI, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CHARLES FELTS, Warden, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Beckley. Robert C. Chambers, District Judge. (5:06-cv-00024) Submitted: June 8, 2007 Decided: July 3, 2007 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael Allen Kokoski, Appellan..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6540 MICHAEL ALLEN KOKOSKI, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CHARLES FELTS, Warden, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Beckley. Robert C. Chambers, District Judge. (5:06-cv-00024) Submitted: June 8, 2007 Decided: July 3, 2007 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael Allen Kokoski, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Michael Allen Kokoski appeals the district court order granting his motion to have the court review the record and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the district court order and affirm for the reasons cited by the district court. See Kokoski v. Felts, No. 5:06-cv-00024 (S.D. W. Va. Mar. 6, 2007). 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 -
