Case Name: Walter Edward HALL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jon P. GALLEY, Assistant Commissioner; G. Lawrence Franklin, Secretary; J. Michael Stouffer; James V. Peguese; K. Daniel Northcraft; John A. Rowley; Casey Campbell, Case Management Manager; B. Cassidy, Case Manager Supervisor; T. Watson, Lieutenant, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-09-24
Citations: 293 F. App'x 984
Docket Number: No. 08-7056
Parties: Walter Edward HALL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jon P. GALLEY, Assistant Commissioner; G. Lawrence Franklin, Secretary; J. Michael Stouffer; James V. Peguese; K. Daniel Northcraft; John A. Rowley; Casey Campbell, Case Management Manager; B. Cassidy, Case Manager Supervisor; T. Watson, Lieutenant, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 293
Pages: 984–984

Head Matter:
Walter Edward HALL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jon P. GALLEY, Assistant Commissioner; G. Lawrence Franklin, Secretary; J. Michael Stouffer; James V. Peguese; K. Daniel Northcraft; John A. Rowley; Casey Campbell, Case Management Manager; B. Cassidy, Case Manager Supervisor; T. Watson, Lieutenant, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 08-7056.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Sept. 16, 2008.
Decided: Sept. 24, 2008.
Walter Edward Hall, Appellant Pro Se. Nichole C. Gatewood, Office of the Attorney General of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Walter Edward Hall appeals the district court's order denying his civil complaint seeking injunctive relief. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Hall v. Galley, No. 8:07-cv-03464-DKC (D.Md. May 19, 2008). 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.