Case ID: f-appx_397/html/0901-01.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

James Arthur BIGGINS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Leah T. SEATON, Deputy Public Defender; John P. Rue, District Public Defender, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 10-7040.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Sept. 28, 2010.
    Decided: Oct. 6, 2010.
    James Arthur Biggins, Appellant Pro Se.
    Before WILKINSON, SHEDD, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
   Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

James Arthur Biggins appeals the district court’s orders dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2006) and denying reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Biggins v. Seaton, No. 8:10-cv-01488-PJM (D. Md. June 11 & July 9, 2010). 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.