Filed: Jun. 24, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-6629 JAMES GREGORY ARMISTEAD, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. LAURA P. WATSON; JENNIE BOWEN; TIMOTHY WARE; ROGER SHACKLEFORD; MOSE DORSEY; SETH EDWARDS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief District Judge. (5:18-ct-03274-BO) Submitted: June 7, 2019 Decided: June 24, 2019 Before NIEMEYER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-6629 JAMES GREGORY ARMISTEAD, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. LAURA P. WATSON; JENNIE BOWEN; TIMOTHY WARE; ROGER SHACKLEFORD; MOSE DORSEY; SETH EDWARDS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief District Judge. (5:18-ct-03274-BO) Submitted: June 7, 2019 Decided: June 24, 2019 Before NIEMEYER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and T..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 19-6629
JAMES GREGORY ARMISTEAD,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
LAURA P. WATSON; JENNIE BOWEN; TIMOTHY WARE; ROGER
SHACKLEFORD; MOSE DORSEY; SETH EDWARDS,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief District Judge. (5:18-ct-03274-BO)
Submitted: June 7, 2019 Decided: June 24, 2019
Before NIEMEYER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James G. Armistead, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
James Gregory Armistead appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42
U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) (2012). We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny the pending
motions and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Armistead v. Watson,
No. 5:18-ct-03274-BO (E.D.N.C. Apr. 19, 2019). 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