Case ID: f-appx_538/html/0302-01.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

John FISHBACK, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DEPUY ORTHOPAEDICS; Ahnad Murthi, MD.; Michael O’Brian; Labid Syad, MD.; Nao B. Odefle, MD.; Barbara Newlon; Sheron Baucom, MD.; Asresahegn Getachew, MD.; Colin Ottey, MD.; Majid Arnaut, MD.; Gary Maynard, Secretary; J.M. Stouffer, Commissioner; Bobby Shearin, Warden; Warden Bishop; Sudair Kathuria, MD.; Corizon; University of Maryland Medical System, Defendants-Appellees.
    
      No. 13-6551.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Aug. 6, 2013.
    Decided: Aug. 23, 2013.
    John Fishback, Appellant Pro Se. Indira Kavita Sharma, Jason M. St. John, Saul Ewing, LLP, Baltimore, Maryland; Stephanie Judith Lane-Weber, Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland; Michelle Jacquelyn Marzullo, Marks, O’Neill, O’Brien, Doherty & Kelly, P.C., Towson, Maryland, for Appellees.
    Before NIEMEYER, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
   PER CURIAM:

John Fishback appeals the district court’s orders denying his motions 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. See Fishback v. Depuy Orthopaedics, No. 1:12-cv-00648-JFM (D. Md. Mar. 28, 2013; Mar. 21, 2013; Mar. 13, 2013; Mar. 7, 2013; Feb. 19, 2013; Sept. 17, 2012; July 31, 2012; June 26, 2012; filed Mar. 1, 2012 & entered Mar. 2, 2012). We deny Fishback’s motions for appointment of counsel. 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.