Filed: Aug. 02, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6494 ALVIN PONSON, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JOSEPH P. SACCHET, Warden; DENNIS WELLER, Officer; MUHAMMAD MOUBAREK, M.D., CMS; COR- RECTIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES; ANY UNKNOWN DEFENDANTS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-00- 2032-L) Submitted: July 26, 2001 Decided: August 2, 2001 Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, a
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6494 ALVIN PONSON, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JOSEPH P. SACCHET, Warden; DENNIS WELLER, Officer; MUHAMMAD MOUBAREK, M.D., CMS; COR- RECTIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES; ANY UNKNOWN DEFENDANTS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-00- 2032-L) Submitted: July 26, 2001 Decided: August 2, 2001 Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, an..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6494 ALVIN PONSON, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JOSEPH P. SACCHET, Warden; DENNIS WELLER, Officer; MUHAMMAD MOUBAREK, M.D., CMS; COR- RECTIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES; ANY UNKNOWN DEFENDANTS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-00- 2032-L) Submitted: July 26, 2001 Decided: August 2, 2001 Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Alvin Ponson, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., At- torney General, Sharon Stanley Street, Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland; Philip Melton Andrews, George Eugene Brown, KRAMON & GRAHAM, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Alvin Ponson, Jr., appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Ponson v. Sacchet, No. CA-00-2032-L (D. Md. Mar. 19, 2001). 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