Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-14-07290/USCOURTS-ca4-14-07290-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
William R. Byars
Appellee
Fowler
Appellee
Bobby Gilbert
Appellant
Tarrance Jackson
Appellee
Rachel Ladagga
Appellee
Joseph McFadden
Appellee
Jerome Middleton
Appellee
Carl Pollen

Ropper
Appellee
Thomas Sears
Appellee
Dante Wright
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7290

BOBBY GILBERT,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

and

CARL POLLEN,

Plaintiff,

v.

WILLIAM R. BYARS, Agency Director, South Carolina Department 

of Corrections; JOSEPH MCFADDEN, Warden; DANTE WRIGHT; 

JEROME MIDDLETON; RACHEL LADAGGA; MS. ROPPER; MS. FOWLER; 

THOMAS SEARS; TARRANCE JACKSON,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Charleston. Mary G. Lewis, District Judge. 

(2:13-cv-02163-MGL)

Submitted: January 22, 2015 Decided: January 27, 2015

Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Bobby Gilbert, Appellant Pro Se. Hugh Willcox Buyck, Gordon 

Wade Cooper, BUYCK, SANDERS & SIMMONS, Charleston, South 

Carolina; Elloree Ann Ganes, Robert Holmes Hood, Benjamin 

Appeal: 14-7290 Doc: 15 Filed: 01/27/2015 Pg: 1 of 3
2

Houston Joyce, Thomas Happel Scurry, HOOD LAW FIRM, Charleston, 

South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-7290 Doc: 15 Filed: 01/27/2015 Pg: 2 of 3
3

PER CURIAM:

Bobby Gilbert appeals the district court’s order 

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and 

dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) claims without prejudice 

for failure to properly exhaust his administrative remedies. We 

have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. 

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district 

court. See Gilbert v. Byars, No. 2:13-cv-02163-MGL (D.S.C. Aug. 

14, 2014). 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: 14-7290 Doc: 15 Filed: 01/27/2015 Pg: 3 of 3