Filed: Dec. 19, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-7049 DEREK L. SIMMS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus IRENE GIBBS; STEVEN WILLIAMS; PAULA KANE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, Senior District Judge. (1:06-cv-03360-WMN) Submitted: December 13, 2007 Decided: December 19, 2007 Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Derek
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-7049 DEREK L. SIMMS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus IRENE GIBBS; STEVEN WILLIAMS; PAULA KANE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, Senior District Judge. (1:06-cv-03360-WMN) Submitted: December 13, 2007 Decided: December 19, 2007 Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Derek L..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-7049 DEREK L. SIMMS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus IRENE GIBBS; STEVEN WILLIAMS; PAULA KANE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, Senior District Judge. (1:06-cv-03360-WMN) Submitted: December 13, 2007 Decided: December 19, 2007 Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Derek L. Simms, Appellant Pro Se. Kevin Bock Karpinski, KARPINSKI, COLARESI & KARP, PA, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Derek L. Simms appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Simms v. Gibbs, No. 1:06-cv-03360-WMN (D. Md. July 9, 2007). 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 -
