Case ID: f-appx_694/html/0152-01.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

Clayton VINES, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Dr. Inder Jeet Singh GUJRAL, Prison Physician, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 17-6349
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: July 27, 2017
    Decided: July 31, 2017
    Clayton Vines, Appellant Pro Se. Christina Marie Dwyer, Ramon Rodriguez, III, RAWLS, MCNELIS & MITCHELL, PC, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Before AGEE and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
   Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Clayton Vines appeals the district court’s order granting Defendant’s motion for summary judgment in this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Vines v. Gujral, No. 2:15-cv-00516-AWA-RJK (E.D. Va. Mar. 2, 2017). 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 
      
       To the extent that Vines seeks to raise new claims on appeal, he fails to demonstrate that exceptional circumstances warrant consideration of those claims. See Pomomo v. United States, 814 F.3d 681, 686 (4th Cir. 2016) ("Absent exceptional circumstances we do not consider issues raised for the first time on appeal.” (ellipsis omitted)).