Case ID: f-appx_461/html/0201-01.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

Clarence BUCKNER, a/k/a Mark Dave Hill, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Ronald WALKER, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 11-6409.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted July 21, 2011.
    Decided July 25, 2011.
    Clarence Buckner, Appellant pro se.
    Before NIEMEYER and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
   Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Clarence Buckner appeals the district court’s orders dismissing his civil complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and denying reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Buckner v. Walker, No. 8:10-cv-03416-DKC (D.Md. Feb. 7, 2011; March 31, 2011). 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