Malcolm Muhammad v. C. Stapleton

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for leave to file amended complaint [998856477-2] Originating case number: 7:11-cv-00610-SGW-RSB. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998922853]. Mailed to: Malcolm Muhammad. [12-6724]

Appeal: 12-6724

Doc: 11

Filed: 08/23/2012

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-6724

MALCOLM MUHAMMAD,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
C. STAPLETON; W. R. HENSLEY; RANDY MATHENA,
Defendants – Appellees,
and
M. STANFORD; B. RARIZEE; K. MASSEY; D. CRABTREE; DR. TATRO;
K. GIVENS,
Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Roanoke.
Samuel G. Wilson, District
Judge. (7:11-cv-00610-SGW-RSB)

Submitted:

August 20, 2012

Decided:

August 23,2012

Before WILKINSON, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Malcolm Muhammad, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 12-6724

Doc: 11

Filed: 08/23/2012

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Malcolm Muhammad appeals the district court’s orders
denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint under 28
U.S.C.

§ 1915A(b)

(2006)

denying

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated
court.

Muhammad

v.

record

Stapleton,

and

for

reversible error.
district

the

motion

We

the

reviewed

his

reconsideration.

by

have

and

No.

00610-SGW-RSB (W.D. Va. Feb. 29 & Apr. 11, 2012).
motion

to

file

an

amended

complaint

and

dispense

find

no

7:11-cv-

We deny the
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