Ibrahim Jabbar v. C. Woody

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:09-cv-00246-TSE-TCB Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998750555]. Mailed to: Ibrahim Jabbar. [10-7506]

Appeal: 10-7506

Document: 18

Date Filed: 12/22/2011

Page: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-7506

IBRAHIM ABDULLAH JABBAR,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
C. T. WOODY, Sheriff; CAPT. ROBINSON, Medical Dept. Sup.;
DR. FURMAN, Head Doctor, RCJ; DEPUTY HARRIS, Mailroom; NURSE
FORD, Medical Dept. RCJ; SGT. JONES, Grievance Coordinator;
LT. COLONEL BURNETT, Jail Operations; MAJ. ROBINSON, Medical
Dept. Supervisor; CAPT. MCREA, Jail Operations RCJ; CHAPLAIN
PRUITT, Under Sheriff, RCJ,
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria.
T.S. Ellis, III, Senior
District Judge. (1:09-cv-00246-TSE-TCB)

Submitted:

December 20, 2011

Decided:

December 22, 2011

Before MOTZ, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ibrahim Abdullah Jabbar, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Douglas Lane,
THOMPSON MCMULLAN PC, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 10-7506

Document: 18

Date Filed: 12/22/2011

Page: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Ibrahim Abdullah Jabbar appeals the district court’s
orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. *
We

have

reviewed

the

record

and

find

no

reversible

error.

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court.

Jabbar v. Woody, No. 1:09-cv-00246-TSE-TCB (E.D. Va.

filed Sept. 29, 2009 & entered Sept. 30, 2009; filed Sept. 9,
2010 & entered Sept. 10, 2010).

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

*

Jabbar filed an untimely notice of appeal.
This court
subsequently remanded this case to the district court for a
determination as to whether Jabbar was entitled to a reopening
of the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). See Jabbar
v.
Woody,
432
F.
App’x
224
(4th
Cir.
May
25,
2011)
(unpublished). Because the district court found that Jabbar is
entitled to the benefit of Rule 4(a)(6), we address the appeal
on the merits.

2