Case Name: Isidro Alexander RUBIO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MCI-H, 2010 STAFF, et al.; RCI 2012 Staff, et al.; Warden Wayne A. Webb; Chief of Security Ronald B. Brezler; Medical Supervisor Ali Salik; Jackelin Shank, Case Management Supervisor, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-04-22
Citations: 567 F. App'x 208
Docket Number: No. 13-8040
Parties: Isidro Alexander RUBIO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MCI-H, 2010 STAFF, et al.; RCI 2012 Staff, et al.; Warden Wayne A. Webb; Chief of Security Ronald B. Brezler; Medical Supervisor Ali Salik; Jackelin Shank, Case Management Supervisor, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 567
Pages: 208–208

Head Matter:
Isidro Alexander RUBIO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MCI-H, 2010 STAFF, et al.; RCI 2012 Staff, et al.; Warden Wayne A. Webb; Chief of Security Ronald B. Brezler; Medical Supervisor Ali Salik; Jackelin Shank, Case Management Supervisor, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 13-8040.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: April 17, 2014.
Decided: April 22, 2014.
Isidro Alexander Rubio, Appellant Pro Se. Rex Schultz Gordon, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland; Patricia H. Beall, MARKS, O’NEILL, O’BRIEN, DOHERTY & KELLY, P.C., Towson, Maryland, for Appellees.
Before WILKINSON, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Isidro Alexander Rubio appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Rubio v. MCI-H, No. 8:12-cv-03046-RWT, 2013 WL 6211742 (D.Md. Nov. 27, 2013). 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.