Filed: Oct. 21, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-6612 GEORGE BRIDGES, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. GARY BASS, Regional Administrator, VA. D.O.C.; HENRY PONTON, Warden; D. SAUNDERS, Institutional Hearing Officer; M. T. LOVE, B Building Lt Building Supervisor; P. R. BROWN, B Building Sgt. Building Sgt., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Mark S. Davis, District Judge. (2:12-cv-00538-MSD-DE
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-6612 GEORGE BRIDGES, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. GARY BASS, Regional Administrator, VA. D.O.C.; HENRY PONTON, Warden; D. SAUNDERS, Institutional Hearing Officer; M. T. LOVE, B Building Lt Building Supervisor; P. R. BROWN, B Building Sgt. Building Sgt., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Mark S. Davis, District Judge. (2:12-cv-00538-MSD-DEM..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-6612
GEORGE BRIDGES, JR.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
GARY BASS, Regional Administrator, VA. D.O.C.; HENRY PONTON,
Warden; D. SAUNDERS, Institutional Hearing Officer; M. T.
LOVE, B Building Lt Building Supervisor; P. R. BROWN, B
Building Sgt. Building Sgt.,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Mark S. Davis, District
Judge. (2:12-cv-00538-MSD-DEM)
Submitted: September 29, 2015 Decided: October 21, 2015
Before MOTZ and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
George Bridges, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Margaret Hoehl O’Shea,
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia,
for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
George Bridges, Jr., appeals the district court’s order
denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We
grant Bridges’ motions to amend to the extent they seek to amend
his informal opening brief and deny his June 19, 2015 motion to
the extent it seeks to amend his original complaint. We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,
we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See
Bridges v. Bass, No. 2:12-cv-00538-MSD-DEM (E.D. Va. Mar. 24,
2015). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
before this court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED
2