UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-1551 ROBERT STANLEY PLIMPTON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus EVELYN COOPER; DAVID FRANCIS; JACK HORTON; MARY ANN ENLOE; JIM STEVENS; HAYWOOD COUNTY; C. TOM ALEXANDER, III; BOBBY SUTTLES; DEAN HENLINE, officially and individually private capacities; STEVEN J. BRYANT; J. MARLENE HYATT, Judge; CHARLES W. HIPPS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Asheville. Lacy H. Thornburg, District Judge. (CA-01-29-1, CA-01-30-1, CA-01-31-1) Submitted: October 18, 2001 Decided: October 25, 2001 Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert Stanley Plimpton, Appellant Pro Se. Andrew Christian Buckner, WOMBLE, CARLYLE, SANDRIDGE & RICE, Winston-Salem, North Carolina; Paul A. Kaplan, Erik David Bolog, WOMBLE, CARLYLE, SANDRIDGE & RICE, Washington, D.C.; Gerald Patrick Murphy, Assis- tant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Robert Plimpton appeals from the district court’s orders dis- missing as frivolous his three civil actions and denying his motion for reconsideration. Our review of the record and the district court’s opinion and orders discloses no reversible error. Accord- ingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Plimpton v. Cooper, Nos. CA-01-29-1; CA-01-30-1; CA-01-31-1 (W.D.N.C. Feb. 22, 2001; Apr. 10, 2001). We deny Plimpton’s motion for production of documents and 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