Case Name: Arthur Matthews NOWELL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Tony COOPER, Engineer Maintenance Supervisor (Professional Hospitality Resources); Miami Davis, Assistant Engineer Supervisor (Professional Hospitality Resources); Dena Current, Human Resource Manager (Professional Hospitality Resources), Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-04-25
Citations: 471 F. App'x 213
Docket Number: No. 12-1313
Parties: Arthur Matthews NOWELL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Tony COOPER, Engineer Maintenance Supervisor (Professional Hospitality Resources); Miami Davis, Assistant Engineer Supervisor (Professional Hospitality Resources); Dena Current, Human Resource Manager (Professional Hospitality Resources), Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 471
Pages: 213–214

Head Matter:
Arthur Matthews NOWELL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Tony COOPER, Engineer Maintenance Supervisor (Professional Hospitality Resources); Miami Davis, Assistant Engineer Supervisor (Professional Hospitality Resources); Dena Current, Human Resource Manager (Professional Hospitality Resources), Defendants-Appellees.
No. 12-1313.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: April 19, 2012.
Decided: April 25, 2012.
Arthur Matthews Nowell, Appellant Pro Se. Sara Berg Rafal, Williams Mullen, Virginia Beach, Virginia, for Appellees.
Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Arthur Matthews Nowell appeals the district court's order granting Defendants' Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss his civil action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Nowell v. Cooper, No. 2:12-cv-00015-MSD-DEM (E.D.Va. Feb. 28, 2012). 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.