Kenneth Sweeting v. Doctor Ulep


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motions to compel [999977168-2], [999968780-2]. Originating case number: 2:14-cv-00157-AWA-RJK. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999990888]. Mailed to: K. Sweeting. [16-7199]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-7199 Doc: 23 Filed: 12/20/2016 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-7199 KENNETH DARNIEL SWEETING, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DOCTOR ULEP, Head Nurse; REGISTERED NURSE WOODRUFF; LP NURSE BALDWIN; NURSE O’NEIL; NURSE BUTTS, (male); NURSE TWEET, Defendants – Appellees, and T. LYONS, Mental Health Psychologist, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Arenda L. Wright Allen, District Judge. (2:14-cv-00157-AWA-RJK) Submitted: December 15, 2016 Decided: December 20, 2016 Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kenneth Darniel Sweeting, Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth Martin Muldowney, RAWLS, MCNELIS & MITCHELL, PC, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees. Appeal: 16-7199 Doc: 23 Filed: 12/20/2016 Pg: 2 of 3 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 Appeal: 16-7199 Doc: 23 Filed: 12/20/2016 Pg: 3 of 3 PER CURIAM: Kenneth Darniel Sweeting appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint for failure to exhaust administrative remedies and the court’s order denying reconsideration. We reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. have reviewed the record and find no Sweeting v. Ulep, No. 2:14-cv-00157-AWA- RJK (E.D. Va. June 29, 2016 & Aug. 15, 2016). We deny Sweeting’s motions to compel 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 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?