Filed: Sep. 04, 2003
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6609 ROOSEVELT TAYLOR, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus D. A. ROBINSON, Warden; D. M. VAUGHAN, Major-Security; RACHEL DOVE, Food Service Director; A. C. DOWNS, Sargent-Security; JO TRENT, Sargent-Security; H. HITE, R.N., Medical Department, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CA-02-510-3) Submit
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6609 ROOSEVELT TAYLOR, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus D. A. ROBINSON, Warden; D. M. VAUGHAN, Major-Security; RACHEL DOVE, Food Service Director; A. C. DOWNS, Sargent-Security; JO TRENT, Sargent-Security; H. HITE, R.N., Medical Department, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CA-02-510-3) Submitt..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6609 ROOSEVELT TAYLOR, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus D. A. ROBINSON, Warden; D. M. VAUGHAN, Major-Security; RACHEL DOVE, Food Service Director; A. C. DOWNS, Sargent-Security; JO TRENT, Sargent-Security; H. HITE, R.N., Medical Department, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CA-02-510-3) Submitted: August 28, 2003 Decided: September 4, 2003 Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Roosevelt Taylor, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Roosevelt Taylor, Jr., appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Taylor v. Robinson, No. CA-02-510-3 (E.D. Va. Apr. 4, 2003). 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