Case Name: Angelo HAM, a/k/a Angelo Bernard Ham, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Anthony J. PADULA; John J. Brooks; Cpl M. Williams; Jon Ozmint; Yvonne McDonald, Nurse Administrator at Lee C.I.; Judy R. Rabon, Nurse Practitioner at Lee C.I.; Sandra Bracey-Simon; Debra Whitney, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-06-22
Citations: 474 F. App'x 240
Docket Number: No. 12-6419
Parties: Angelo HAM, a/k/a Angelo Bernard Ham, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Anthony J. PADULA; John J. Brooks; Cpl M. Williams; Jon Ozmint; Yvonne McDonald, Nurse Administrator at Lee C.I.; Judy R. Rabon, Nurse Practitioner at Lee C.I.; Sandra Bracey-Simon; Debra Whitney, Defendants—Appellees.
Judges: Before KING, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 474
Pages: 240–241

Head Matter:
Angelo HAM, a/k/a Angelo Bernard Ham, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Anthony J. PADULA; John J. Brooks; Cpl M. Williams; Jon Ozmint; Yvonne McDonald, Nurse Administrator at Lee C.I.; Judy R. Rabon, Nurse Practitioner at Lee C.I.; Sandra Bracey-Simon; Debra Whitney, Defendants—Appellees.
No. 12-6419.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: June 13, 2012.
Decided: June 22, 2012.
Angelo Ham, Appellant Pro Se. Steven Barry Johnson, Lee Erter Wilson Holler & Smith, LLC, Sumter, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Before KING, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Angelo B. Ham appeals the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and 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. Ham v. Padula, No. 6:10-cv-03058-JMC, 2012 WL 602817 (D.S.C. Feb. 24, 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.