Robert Dent v. Colin Ottey


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 8:15-cv-00206-CCB Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000166732]. Mailed to: Robert Dent. [17-6396]

Download PDF
Appeal: 17-6396 Doc: 13 Filed: 10/03/2017 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-6396 ROBERT DENT, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. COLIN OTTEY, MD, Regional Medical Director, Defendant - Appellee, and WEXFORD HEALTH SOURCES, INCORPORATED; GILMORE JANICE, Supervisor Medical Provider; ROBUSTIANO BARRERA, Medical Provider; PEGGY MAHLER, Medical Provider, Defendants Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Catherine C. Blake, Chief District Judge. (8:15-cv-00206-CCB) Submitted: September 11, 2017 Before DUNCAN, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Decided: October 3, 2017 Appeal: 17-6396 Doc: 13 Filed: 10/03/2017 Pg: 2 of 3 Robert Dent, Appellant Pro Se. Douglas Conrad Meister, Gina Marie Smith, MEYERS, RODBELL & ROSENBAUM, PA, Riverdale, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 Appeal: 17-6396 Doc: 13 Filed: 10/03/2017 Pg: 3 of 3 PER CURIAM: Robert Dent appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of Defendant Colin Ottey as to Dent’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) claim of deliberate indifference to his medical needs. * We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm substantially for the reasons stated by the district court. Dent v. Ottey, No. 8:15-cv-00206-CCB (D. Md. Mar. 9, 2017); see also Harrods Ltd. v. Sixty Internet Domain Names, 302 F.3d 214, 244-45 (4th Cir. 2002) (discussing requirements to preserve claim that summary judgment was granted prematurely). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. We 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 * Although Dent’s informal brief also identifies the district court’s March 17, 2016, order dismissing the action in part and granting summary judgment in part, we conclude that we lack jurisdiction to review that order. See Fed. R. App. P. 3(c)(1)(B); Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 176-77 (4th Cir. 2014). 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?