Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-15-06996/USCOURTS-ca4-15-06996-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 

---

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-6996

CHRISTOPHER M. OXENDINE-BEY,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

JOHN HINSON; JOHN BODY; JOHN GRAY; JANE WILLIAMS; JOHN 

DANIELS; JOHN HAIRING; JOHN STOCK; JOHN MOYER; JOHN 

SINGLETON; JANE HART; JOHN LENNON,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior 

District Judge. (5:15-ct-03001-F)

Submitted: November 17, 2015 Decided: November 19, 2015

Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Christopher M. Oxendine-Bey, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-6996 Doc: 15 Filed: 11/19/2015 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Christopher M. Oxendine-Bey appeals the district court’s 

order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) action without 

prejudice under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012). We have 

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, 

we affirm substantially for the reasons stated by the district 

court.* Oxendine-Bey v. Hinson, No. 5:15-ct-03001-F (E.D.N.C. 

May 11 & June 16, 2015). 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

 * Insofar as Oxendine-Bey’s complaint could be construed as 

raising a “failure to protect” claim unrelated to his excessive 

force claim, we conclude this claim also would be subject to 

dismissal. See Danser v. Stansbury, 772 F.3d 340, 346-47 (4th 

Cir. 2014).

Appeal: 15-6996 Doc: 15 Filed: 11/19/2015 Pg: 2 of 2