Filed: May 18, 2005
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-6120 ANTHONY LEON HOOVER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WILLIAM T. SCHATZMAN, Head Sheriff; WAYNE JAMES, Mayor; JANIET SIPE, Sgt.; KANJENNER WILKS, Head Nurse, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. James A. Beaty, Jr., District Judge. (CA-04-863) Submitted: May 12, 2005 Decided: May 18, 2005 Before TRAXLER, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-6120 ANTHONY LEON HOOVER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WILLIAM T. SCHATZMAN, Head Sheriff; WAYNE JAMES, Mayor; JANIET SIPE, Sgt.; KANJENNER WILKS, Head Nurse, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. James A. Beaty, Jr., District Judge. (CA-04-863) Submitted: May 12, 2005 Decided: May 18, 2005 Before TRAXLER, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. A..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-6120 ANTHONY LEON HOOVER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WILLIAM T. SCHATZMAN, Head Sheriff; WAYNE JAMES, Mayor; JANIET SIPE, Sgt.; KANJENNER WILKS, Head Nurse, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. James A. Beaty, Jr., District Judge. (CA-04-863) Submitted: May 12, 2005 Decided: May 18, 2005 Before TRAXLER, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Anthony Leon Hoover, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Anthony Leon Hoover seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and dismissing his complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) without prejudice. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm substantially on the reasoning of the district court. See Hoover v. Schatzman, No. CA-04-863 (M.D.N.C. Jan. 4, 2005). 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 -
