Case ID: f-appx_549/html/0181-02.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

Korell BATTLE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Darryl KING; Jan Pittman; SCDC, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 13-7579.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Dec. 19, 2013.
    Decided: Dec. 24, 2013.
    Korell Battle, Appellant Pro Se.
    Nikole D. Haltiwanger, Roy F. Laney, Thomas Lowndes Pope, Jayme Leigh Shy, Damon C. Wlodarczyk, Riley, Pope & La-ney, LLC, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.
    Before SHEDD, DAVIS, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
   Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Korell Battle appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Battle v. King, No. 2:12-cv-02476-CMC, 2013 WL 5203650 (D.S.C. Sept. 16, 2013). 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.