Filed: May 04, 2010
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6206 LAMONT HENDERSON, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, Defendant – Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (3:09-cv-02962-CMC) Submitted: April 29, 2010 Decided: May 4, 2010 Before MOTZ and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lam
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6206 LAMONT HENDERSON, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, Defendant – Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (3:09-cv-02962-CMC) Submitted: April 29, 2010 Decided: May 4, 2010 Before MOTZ and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lamo..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-6206
LAMONT HENDERSON,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Defendant – Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Columbia. Cameron McGowan Currie, District
Judge. (3:09-cv-02962-CMC)
Submitted: April 29, 2010 Decided: May 4, 2010
Before MOTZ and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Lamont Henderson, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Lamont Henderson appeals the district court’s order
accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
dismissing without prejudice Henderson’s civil complaint for
failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii)
(2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the
district court. Henderson v. U.S. Attorney Gen., No. 3:09-cv-
02962-CMC (D.S.C. filed Jan. 7, 2010; entered Jan. 8, 2010). 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