Filed: Oct. 25, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-6954 NORMAN RUFFIN, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. (FIRST NAME UNKNOWN) CALHOUN, Medical Doctor, LVCC; (FIRST NAME UNKNOWN) CLEMENTS, Medical Doctor, LVCC; (FIRST NAME UNKNOWN) LANGFORD, Medical Doctor, LVCC; (FIRST NAME UNKNOWN) HIGHTOWER, Medical Nurse, LVCC; (FIRST NAME UNKNOWN) D. GOODE, Medical Director, LVCC, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfo
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-6954 NORMAN RUFFIN, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. (FIRST NAME UNKNOWN) CALHOUN, Medical Doctor, LVCC; (FIRST NAME UNKNOWN) CLEMENTS, Medical Doctor, LVCC; (FIRST NAME UNKNOWN) LANGFORD, Medical Doctor, LVCC; (FIRST NAME UNKNOWN) HIGHTOWER, Medical Nurse, LVCC; (FIRST NAME UNKNOWN) D. GOODE, Medical Director, LVCC, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfol..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-6954
NORMAN RUFFIN,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
(FIRST NAME UNKNOWN) CALHOUN, Medical Doctor, LVCC; (FIRST
NAME UNKNOWN) CLEMENTS, Medical Doctor, LVCC; (FIRST NAME
UNKNOWN) LANGFORD, Medical Doctor, LVCC; (FIRST NAME
UNKNOWN) HIGHTOWER, Medical Nurse, LVCC; (FIRST NAME
UNKNOWN) D. GOODE, Medical Director, LVCC,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior
District Judge. (2:16-cv-00186-RGD-DEM)
Submitted: October 17, 2016 Decided: October 25, 2016
Before NIEMEYER, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Norman Ruffin, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Norman Ruffin appeals the district court’s order dismissing
his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint without prejudice for
failure to comply with its prior order. See Fed. R. Civ. P.
41(b). We review a district court’s dismissal under Rule 41(b)
for abuse of discretion. Ballard v. Carlson,
882 F.2d 93, 95
(4th Cir. 1989). We have reviewed the record and find no abuse
of discretion. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by
the district court. Ruffin v. Calhoun, No. 2:16-cv-00186-RGD-
DEM (E.D. Va. June 10, 2016). 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