Filed: Jul. 06, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-6250 CHRISTOPHER JOSE MCLEAN, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. LORENZ P. KIELHORN, (M.O) Doctor at Sussex 1 State Prison, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (1:16-cv-00136-JCC-IDD) Submitted: June 23, 2017 Decided: July 6, 2017 Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-6250 CHRISTOPHER JOSE MCLEAN, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. LORENZ P. KIELHORN, (M.O) Doctor at Sussex 1 State Prison, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (1:16-cv-00136-JCC-IDD) Submitted: June 23, 2017 Decided: July 6, 2017 Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished p..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 17-6250
CHRISTOPHER JOSE MCLEAN, JR.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
LORENZ P. KIELHORN, (M.O) Doctor at Sussex 1 State Prison,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (1:16-cv-00136-JCC-IDD)
Submitted: June 23, 2017 Decided: July 6, 2017
Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Christopher Jose McLean, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Christopher Jose McLean, Jr., appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42
U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint without prejudice pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). We
have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the
reasons stated by the district court. See McLean v. Kielhorn, No. 1:16-cv-00136-JCC-
IDD (E.D. Va. Jan. 19, 2017). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument
would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
2