Antoine China v. Lt. Marskberry

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to dismiss appeal [999499524-2]; denying Motion to appoint/assign counsel [999489708-2] Originating case number: 5:13-cv-00091-JMC Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999727199]. Mailed to: Antoine J. China PERRY CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION 430 Oaklawn Road Pelzer, SC 29669-0000. [14-7674]

Appeal: 14-7674

Doc: 21

Filed: 12/30/2015

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7674

ANTOINE J. CHINA,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
LT. MARSKBERRY; MAJOR NETTLES;
WILLIAM R. BYARS, JR., Director,

WARDEN

FRED

B.

THOMPSON;

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Orangeburg.
J. Michelle Childs, District
Judge. (5:13-cv-00091-JMC)

Submitted:

December 14, 2015

Decided:

December 30, 2015

Before MOTZ, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Antoine J. China, Appellant Pro Se. Hugh Willcox Buyck, Gordon
Wade Cooper, BUYCK, SANDERS & SIMMONS, Charleston, South
Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-7674

Doc: 21

Filed: 12/30/2015

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Antoine J. China appeals from the district court’s order
adopting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and granting
summary judgment to Defendants in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012)
civil

rights

magistrate

action.

judge’s

He

challenges

rulings

denying

that

his

ruling

motions

counsel, to compel, and for a default judgment.

and

to

the

appoint

Appellees move

to dismiss the appeal as untimely.
We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
We further conclude that the notice of appeal was timely filed.
Accordingly, we deny the motion to dismiss the appeal and affirm
for the reasons stated by the district court and the magistrate
judge.

China

(D.S.C. Apr.

11,

v.

Lt.

Sept.

9

Marskberry,
&

Oct.

3,

No.
2013;

5:13-cv-00091-JMC
Sept.

4,

2014).

We deny China’s motion to appoint counsel and 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