Filed: Sep. 13, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 26, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-1789 MASTER WAHOO RAHMAAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA; DEPARTMENT OF HOSPITAL SAFETY AND SECURITY; DEPARTMENT STORM EYE INSTITUTION, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. C. Weston Houck, Senior District Judge. (2:11-cv-03314-CWH) Submitted: September 11, 2012 Decided: September 13, 2012 Before NIEMEYER, SHE
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-1789 MASTER WAHOO RAHMAAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA; DEPARTMENT OF HOSPITAL SAFETY AND SECURITY; DEPARTMENT STORM EYE INSTITUTION, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. C. Weston Houck, Senior District Judge. (2:11-cv-03314-CWH) Submitted: September 11, 2012 Decided: September 13, 2012 Before NIEMEYER, SHED..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-1789 MASTER WAHOO RAHMAAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA; DEPARTMENT OF HOSPITAL SAFETY AND SECURITY; DEPARTMENT STORM EYE INSTITUTION, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. C. Weston Houck, Senior District Judge. (2:11-cv-03314-CWH) Submitted: September 11, 2012 Decided: September 13, 2012 Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Master Wahoo Rahmaan, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Master Wahoo Rahmaan appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing without prejudice his complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Rahmaan v. Medical Univ. of South Carolina, No. 2:11-cv-03314-CWH (D.S.C. June 18, 2012). 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
