Case ID: f-appx_60/html/0465-01.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

Mario BALLARD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CHAIRMAN, VIRGINIA PAROLE BOARD, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 03-6137.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted March 20, 2003.
    Decided March 31, 2003.
    Mario Ballard, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Carson Vorhis, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Before WILLIAMS and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   PER CURIAM.

Mario Ballard appeals the magistrate judge’s order denying his motion to amend his complaint in an action that was closed. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the magistrate judge. See Ballard v. Chairman, Va. Parole Bd., No. CA-01-235-7 (W.D.Va. Sept. 30, 2002). Ballard’s motion for hearing en banc is denied. 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.