Filed: May 09, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-6486 WILLIAM K. DIXON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. KRISTI CORTEZ, RN; KRISTA BILAK, RNP; MULUGETA AKAL, M.D.; WARDEN FRANK BISHOP, JR., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Theodore D. Chuang, District Judge. (8:17-cv-00503-TDC) Submitted: April 22, 2019 Decided: May 9, 2019 Before WILKINSON, FLOYD, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-6486 WILLIAM K. DIXON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. KRISTI CORTEZ, RN; KRISTA BILAK, RNP; MULUGETA AKAL, M.D.; WARDEN FRANK BISHOP, JR., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Theodore D. Chuang, District Judge. (8:17-cv-00503-TDC) Submitted: April 22, 2019 Decided: May 9, 2019 Before WILKINSON, FLOYD, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished p..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 18-6486
WILLIAM K. DIXON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
KRISTI CORTEZ, RN; KRISTA BILAK, RNP; MULUGETA AKAL, M.D.;
WARDEN FRANK BISHOP, JR.,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt.
Theodore D. Chuang, District Judge. (8:17-cv-00503-TDC)
Submitted: April 22, 2019 Decided: May 9, 2019
Before WILKINSON, FLOYD, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
William K. Dixon, Appellant Pro Se. Douglas Conrad Meister, Gina Marie Smith,
MEYERS, RODBELL & ROSENBAUM, PA, Riverdale Park, Maryland, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
William K. Dixon appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to
the Defendants in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) action. We have reviewed the record and
find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. See Dixon v. Cortez, No. 8:17-cv-00503-TDC (D. Md. Mar. 22, 2018). 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