Filed: Feb. 24, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-2485 ROBERT JOHN SCHIEBLE, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus TROY KNIGHT; JAMES BELL; PATRICK WATTS; TOLBERT GOOLSBY; JASPUTON CREATON; KENNETH RICHSTAD; CRISTINE BERG; JEAN TOAL; CHARLIE CONDON; OTHER ASSOCIATE JUSTICES, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. C. Weston Houck, Senior District Judge. (CA-03-2068-3-12) Submitted: February 19, 20
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-2485 ROBERT JOHN SCHIEBLE, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus TROY KNIGHT; JAMES BELL; PATRICK WATTS; TOLBERT GOOLSBY; JASPUTON CREATON; KENNETH RICHSTAD; CRISTINE BERG; JEAN TOAL; CHARLIE CONDON; OTHER ASSOCIATE JUSTICES, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. C. Weston Houck, Senior District Judge. (CA-03-2068-3-12) Submitted: February 19, 200..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-2485 ROBERT JOHN SCHIEBLE, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus TROY KNIGHT; JAMES BELL; PATRICK WATTS; TOLBERT GOOLSBY; JASPUTON CREATON; KENNETH RICHSTAD; CRISTINE BERG; JEAN TOAL; CHARLIE CONDON; OTHER ASSOCIATE JUSTICES, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. C. Weston Houck, Senior District Judge. (CA-03-2068-3-12) Submitted: February 19, 2004 Decided: February 24, 2004 Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert John Schieble, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Robert John Schieble, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief without prejudice on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Schieble’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal for the reasons stated by the district court. See Schieble v. Knight, No. CA-03-2068-3-12 (D.S.C. filed Nov. 3, 2003 & entered Nov. 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. DISMISSED - 2 -