Case ID: f-appx_479/html/0510-01.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

Lord VERSATILE, a/k/a Venson Leon Coward, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Loretta KELLY, Warden, Sussex I State Prison; A.F. Miller, Operations Officer, Sussex I State Prison; L. Rodrigues, Correctional Officer Sgt., Sussex I State Prison; G. Davis, Correctional Officer, Sussex I State Prison; H. Mavor, Sgt., Hearing Officer, Sussex I State Prison; R. Tuell, Captain, Sussex I State Prison; A. David Robinson, Regional Director, Eastern Office; Gene M. Johnson, Former Director, VDOC; R.W. Sprouse, Intel-Officer, Sussex I State Prison; W. Brown, IHO, Sussex I State Prison; K. Fowlkes, Former Unit Manager, Defendants-Appellees, and D. Hudson, Grievance Coordinator, Sussex I State Prison; Sharon S. Burgess, Regional Office Appeals Manager; Melissa Welch, Offender Discipline Unit Manager; John M. Jabe, Deputy Director, VDOC; T. Fowlkes, Unit Manager, Sussex I State Prison, Defendants.
    No. 12-6858.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Sept. 27, 2012.
    Decided: Oct. 2, 2012.
    Lord Versatile, Appellant Pro Se.
    Before MOTZ, DAVIS, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
   Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Lord Versatile appeals the district court’s order dismissing with prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1988 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Versatile v. Kelly, No. 3:11-cv-00308-HEH, 2012 WL 1267896 (E.D.Va. Apr. 13, 2012). 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. 
      
       On appeal, Versatile does not contest the district court's dismissal of two of his claims without prejudice to his right to refile the claims in new complaints.