Mark Jones v. Dr. Butler
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to appoint/assign counsel [999896523-2] Originating case number: 2:15-cv-00316-MSD-RJK Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999975543]. Mailed to: appellant. [16-6939]
Appeal: 16-6939
Doc: 22
Filed: 11/28/2016
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-6939
MARK JACOB JONES,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
DR. BUTLER, M.D.; DR. GRAHAM, M.D.,
Defendants – Appellees,
and
WESTERN TIDEWATER REGIONAL JAIL; MEDICAL STAFF; FOOD KITCHEN
STAFF; KEN PEARE; OFFICER BATAKIS; ROBERT ROMENNITI, M.D.;
SUPERINTENDENT PARHAM; ARAMARK FOODS,
Defendants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk.
Mark S. Davis, District
Judge. (2:15-cv-00316-MSD-RJK)
Submitted:
November 22, 2016
Before DIAZ and
Circuit Judge.
THACKER,
Circuit
Decided:
Judges,
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
November 28, 2016
and
DAVIS,
Senior
Appeal: 16-6939
Doc: 22
Filed: 11/28/2016
Pg: 2 of 3
Mark Jacob Jones, Appellant Pro Se.
NORRIS & ST. CLAIR P.C., Virginia
Appellees.
Jonathan Lewis Stone,
Beach, Virginia, for
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
Appeal: 16-6939
Doc: 22
Filed: 11/28/2016
Pg: 3 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Mark Jacob Jones appeals the district court’s order denying
relief
on
his
42
U.S.C.
§ 1983
(2012)
complaint.
reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
We
have
Accordingly,
we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.
Jones
v. Butler, No. 2:15-cv-00316-MSD-RJK (E.D. Va. June 30, 2016).
We deny Jones’ motion to appoint counsel, and we dispense with
oral
argument
adequately
because
presented
in
the
the
facts
and
materials
legal
before
contentions
this
court
are
and
argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?