Filed: May 15, 2003
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6035 DAVID GRAHAM, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JAMES B. ROBBINS, Judge; PRINCE WILLIAM COUNTY CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT; LOUVENIA STREET, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chief District Judge. (CA-02-1619-AM) Submitted: April 23, 2003 Decided: May 15, 2003 Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirm
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6035 DAVID GRAHAM, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JAMES B. ROBBINS, Judge; PRINCE WILLIAM COUNTY CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT; LOUVENIA STREET, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chief District Judge. (CA-02-1619-AM) Submitted: April 23, 2003 Decided: May 15, 2003 Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirme..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6035 DAVID GRAHAM, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JAMES B. ROBBINS, Judge; PRINCE WILLIAM COUNTY CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT; LOUVENIA STREET, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chief District Judge. (CA-02-1619-AM) Submitted: April 23, 2003 Decided: May 15, 2003 Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. David Graham, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: David Graham appeals the district court’s order dismissing Graham’s amended 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Graham v. Robbins, No. CA-02-1619-AM (E.D. Va. Dec. 18, 2002). 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
