Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-15-02395/USCOURTS-ca4-15-02395-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Kristina Deeds
Appellee
Matthew Mardres
Appellee
Bradley Meredith
Appellant

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-2395

BRADLEY MEREDITH,

Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

KRISTINA DEEDS; MATTHEW MARDRES,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of Virginia, at Abingdon. James P. Jones, District 

Judge. (1:15-cv-00053-JPJ)

Submitted: March 31, 2016 Decided: April 6, 2016

Before NIEMEYER, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Bradley Meredith, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-2395 Doc: 14 Filed: 04/06/2016 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Bradley Meredith appeals the district court’s order 

dismissing his complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) 

(2012) for failure to state a claim. Pursuant to 

§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), a district “court shall dismiss [a] case at 

any time” if the action “fails to state a claim on which relief 

may be granted.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). We review the 

dismissal of an action under § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) de novo. 

De’Lonta v. Angelone, 330 F.3d 630, 633 (4th Cir. 2003). 

Because Meredith’s complaint alleges violation of his 

constitutional rights, he presumably was attempting to bring a 

42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) action. However, only those acting 

under color of state law are amenable to suit under § 1983. See

West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988). Here, Meredith has 

failed to allege that the defendants (the mother of his child 

and the mother’s current partner) were state actors or provide 

any other legal basis for his suit. 

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. 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

Appeal: 15-2395 Doc: 14 Filed: 04/06/2016 Pg: 2 of 2