Case ID: f-appx_289/html/0651-02.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

Albert Curtis MILLS, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. WARDEN, Defendant—Appellee.
    No. 08-6371.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Aug. 14, 2008.
    Decided: Aug. 19, 2008.
    Albert Curtis Mills, Appellant Pro Se.
    
      Before MICHAEL, Circuit Judge, and WILKINS and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
   PER CURIAM:

Albert Curtis Mills seeks to appeal the district court’s order placing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint on the unassigned docket in accordance with Mills’ pre-filing injunction. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that the district court did not err. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Mills v. Warden, No. 8:07-cv-03466-DKC (D.Md. Jan. 8, 2008). 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.