Filed: Oct. 27, 2008
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6753 BRANDON M. LILLARD, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. JANE DOE RICHARDSON, Corrections Officer; JANE DOE GAY, Corrections Officer, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (2:07-cv-00259-RAJ-FBS) Submitted: October 21, 2008 Decided: October 27, 2008 Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by u
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6753 BRANDON M. LILLARD, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. JANE DOE RICHARDSON, Corrections Officer; JANE DOE GAY, Corrections Officer, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (2:07-cv-00259-RAJ-FBS) Submitted: October 21, 2008 Decided: October 27, 2008 Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by un..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-6753
BRANDON M. LILLARD,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
JANE DOE RICHARDSON, Corrections Officer; JANE DOE GAY,
Corrections Officer,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District
Judge. (2:07-cv-00259-RAJ-FBS)
Submitted: October 21, 2008 Decided: October 27, 2008
Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Brandon M. Lillard, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Brandon M. Lillard appeals the district court’s order
dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) action
for failure to prosecute and for noncompliance with court
orders. A plaintiff’s failure to prosecute or to comply with
the federal procedural rules or an order of the court may
warrant involuntary dismissal. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). We
review a district court’s dismissal under Rule 41(b) for abuse
of discretion. Ballard v. Carlson,
882 F.2d 93, 95-96 (4th Cir.
1989). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the
district court. See Lillard v. Richardson, No. 2:07-cv-00259-
RAJ-FBS (E.D. Va. filed Apr. 2, 2008; entered Apr. 3, 2008). 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