Filed: Apr. 30, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 26, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-2417 TOMMY LEE STEVENS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNKNOWN NAME CLERK OF U.S. CONGRESSMAN WALTER JONES GREENVILLE, NC DISTRICT OFFICE, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:11-cv-00519-FL) Submitted: April 26, 2012 Decided: April 30, 2012 Before GREGORY, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpub
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-2417 TOMMY LEE STEVENS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNKNOWN NAME CLERK OF U.S. CONGRESSMAN WALTER JONES GREENVILLE, NC DISTRICT OFFICE, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:11-cv-00519-FL) Submitted: April 26, 2012 Decided: April 30, 2012 Before GREGORY, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpubl..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-2417 TOMMY LEE STEVENS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNKNOWN NAME CLERK OF U.S. CONGRESSMAN WALTER JONES GREENVILLE, NC DISTRICT OFFICE, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:11-cv-00519-FL) Submitted: April 26, 2012 Decided: April 30, 2012 Before GREGORY, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Tommy Lee Stevens, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Tommy Lee Stevens appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his motion to reopen and affirming its earlier order accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and dismissing his mandamus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Stevens v. Unknown Name Clerk, No. 5:11-cv- 00519-FL (E.D.N.C. Dec. 15, 2011). 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
