Filed: Apr. 23, 2013
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-6020 KENNETH V. AWE, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (7:12-cv-00581-JLK-RSB) Submitted: April 18, 2013 Decided: April 23, 2013 Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kenneth V. Awe
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-6020 KENNETH V. AWE, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (7:12-cv-00581-JLK-RSB) Submitted: April 18, 2013 Decided: April 23, 2013 Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kenneth V. Awe,..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-6020 KENNETH V. AWE, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (7:12-cv-00581-JLK-RSB) Submitted: April 18, 2013 Decided: April 23, 2013 Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kenneth V. Awe, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Kenneth V. Awe appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Awe v. Virginia Dep’t of Corr., No. 7:12-cv-00581-JLK-RSB (W.D. Va. Dec. 6, 2012). 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
