Filed: Sep. 01, 2006
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7038 JAMES KEVIN BLACK, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus S. DAWKINS; F. STAMPER; NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, Division of Prisons, Lanesboro Correctional Institution, Medical Department, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Senior District Judge. (3:06-cv-00194-MU) Submitted: August 24, 2006 Decided: Septembe
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7038 JAMES KEVIN BLACK, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus S. DAWKINS; F. STAMPER; NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, Division of Prisons, Lanesboro Correctional Institution, Medical Department, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Senior District Judge. (3:06-cv-00194-MU) Submitted: August 24, 2006 Decided: September..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7038 JAMES KEVIN BLACK, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus S. DAWKINS; F. STAMPER; NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, Division of Prisons, Lanesboro Correctional Institution, Medical Department, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Senior District Judge. (3:06-cv-00194-MU) Submitted: August 24, 2006 Decided: September 1, 2006 Before KING, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James Kevin Black, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: James Kevin Black appeals the district court’s order 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. Black v. Dawkins, No. 3:06-cv-00194-MU (W.D.N.C. filed May 2, 2006 & entered May 3, 2006). We deny Black’s motion for production of documents. 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 -
