Filed: Dec. 20, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-7298 EDWARD L. MOSES, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus ROBERT HAM; BELINDA DUDLEY; MICHAEL A. HARDEE; MICHAEL J. LAMM; FINESSE G. COUCH, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, Chief District Judge. (5:07-ct-03082) Submitted: December 13, 2007 Decided: December 20, 2007 Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Dism
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-7298 EDWARD L. MOSES, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus ROBERT HAM; BELINDA DUDLEY; MICHAEL A. HARDEE; MICHAEL J. LAMM; FINESSE G. COUCH, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, Chief District Judge. (5:07-ct-03082) Submitted: December 13, 2007 Decided: December 20, 2007 Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Dismi..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-7298 EDWARD L. MOSES, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus ROBERT HAM; BELINDA DUDLEY; MICHAEL A. HARDEE; MICHAEL J. LAMM; FINESSE G. COUCH, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, Chief District Judge. (5:07-ct-03082) Submitted: December 13, 2007 Decided: December 20, 2007 Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Edward L. Moses, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Edward L. Moses, a North Carolina inmate, appeals the district court’s order dismissing his civil rights claim regarding the grievance procedure under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2000). We have reviewed the record and find that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for the reasons stated by the district court. Moses v. Ham, No. 5:07-ct-03082 (E.D.N.C. filed Aug. 15, 2007; entered Aug. 16, 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. DISMISSED - 2 -
