Case ID: f-appx_467/html/0201-01.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

Earl THOMAS, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Benjamin ULEP, Medical Doctor; Benjamin Ulep, Individual, Defendants—Appellees.
    No. 11-7319.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Feb. 23, 2012.
    Decided: Feb. 27, 2012.
    Earl B. Thomas, III, Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth Martin Muldowney, Rawls & McNelis, PC, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
    Before MOTZ, DAVIS, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
   PER CURIAM:

Earl Thomas appeals the district court’s orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint and denying Thomas’ motion to amend his complaint to add new defendants. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Thomas v. Ulep, No. 1:10-cv-00245-CMH-JFA, 2011 WL 864311 (E.D. Va. filed Mar. 9 & entered Mar. 10, 2011); 2011 WL 4102219 (filed Sept. 13 & entered Sept. 14, 2011). Further, we deny Thomas’ motion to compel the production of documents. 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.