Case Name: Anthony LAMBERT, Sr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Edward E. WEBB, individually and in his official capacity as Sheriff of Gates County, North Carolina; Kevin L. Byrd, individually and in his official capacity as Sergeant of Gates County, North Carolina; Gates County, North Carolina; Gates County Defendants, Defendants-Appellees, and Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland; E.W. Jones, individually, Defendants
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2002-05-20
Citations: 34 F. App'x 923
Docket Number: No. 01-2358
Parties: Anthony LAMBERT, Sr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Edward E. WEBB, individually and in his official capacity as Sheriff of Gates County, North Carolina; Kevin L. Byrd, individually and in his offi cial capacity as Sergeant of Gates County, North Carolina; Gates County, North Carolina; Gates County Defendants, Defendants-Appellees, and Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland; E.W. Jones, individually, Defendants.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 34
Pages: 923–924

Head Matter:
Anthony LAMBERT, Sr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Edward E. WEBB, individually and in his official capacity as Sheriff of Gates County, North Carolina; Kevin L. Byrd, individually and in his offi cial capacity as Sergeant of Gates County, North Carolina; Gates County, North Carolina; Gates County Defendants, Defendants-Appellees, and Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland; E.W. Jones, individually, Defendants.
No. 01-2358.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted April 24, 2002.
Decided May 20, 2002.
Anthony Lambert, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Mark Allen Davis, Tamara Paragino Williams Desai, Womble, Carlyle, Sandridge & Rice, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Before WIDENER, WILKINS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Anthony Lambert, Sr., appeals the district court's orders denying his motion to remand the action to state court and dismissing the action pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 37(b), 41(b). We have reviewed the record and the district court's orders and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Lambert v. Webb, No. CA-00-60-2-BO (E.D.N.C. Feb. 13, 2001; Sept. 21, 2001). 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.