Case ID: f-appx_92/html/0972-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

G. Mark SEALS, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. CITY OF WHEELING, West Virginia, as a municipal corporation; Joseph Petri, former Wheeling Police Chief, individually and in official capacity; Thomas Miller, Wheeling Police Officer, individually and in official capacity; John Daniel, Wheeling Police Sergeant, individually and in official capacity; Taris Farabee, Wheeling Police Officer, individually and in official capacity; John Doe, One or more unnamed, individually and for officially sanctioned actions; Law Enforcement, any unidentified law enforcement personnel, individually and in official capacities; Manufacturer/Supplier of Pepper Spray, identity of corporation to be determined and for officially sanctioned actions; Odgen Newspapers, Incorporated, a West Virginia Corporation and for officially sanctioned actions; Ohio County, West Virginia, a West Virginia political subdivision for declaratory and injunctive relief only; Scott Smith, The Honorable, Ohio County Prosecuting Attorney, for declaratory and injunctive relief only; State of West Virginia, Defendants—Appellees.
    No. 03-2356.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: March 31, 2004.
    Decided: April 13, 2004.
    G. Mark Seals, Appellant pro se.
    Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
   PER CURIAM:

G. Mark Seals appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Seals v. City of Wheeling, No. CA-02-68-5 (N.D.W.Va. Oct. 9, 2003). We dispense 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