Case Name: Anthony Leon HOOVER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BERTIE CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTE NUMBER 4880, Mailroom Department Service and Other Blue Unit JC-42; Lanesboro Correctional Institution, Mailroom Department Service and Other Blue Unit JD-44; Central Prison, Mailroom Department Service and Other Dorm F7 Room EL110; Forsyth County Detention Center, Mailroom Department Service and Other Room 10A-17, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-04-03
Citations: 272 F. App'x 238
Docket Number: No. 07-7742
Parties: Anthony Leon HOOVER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BERTIE CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTE NUMBER 4880, Mailroom Department Service and Other Blue Unit JC-42; Lanesboro Correctional Institution, Mailroom Department Service and Other Blue Unit JD-44; Central Prison, Mailroom Department Service and Other Dorm F7 Room EL110; Forsyth County Detention Center, Mailroom Department Service and Other Room 10A-17, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 272
Pages: 238–239

Head Matter:
Anthony Leon HOOVER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BERTIE CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTE NUMBER 4880, Mailroom Department Service and Other Blue Unit JC-42; Lanesboro Correctional Institution, Mailroom Department Service and Other Blue Unit JD-44; Central Prison, Mailroom Department Service and Other Dorm F7 Room EL110; Forsyth County Detention Center, Mailroom Department Service and Other Room 10A-17, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 07-7742.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: March 27, 2008.
Decided: April 3, 2008.
Anthony Leon Hoover, Appellant Pro se.
Before TRAXLER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Anthony Leon Hoover appeals the district court's order adopting the recom mendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Hoover v. Bertie Correction Inst, No. 1:07-cv-00615-N CT-WWD (M.D.N.C. Nov. 15, 2007). We deny Hoover's motion to amend his complaint, deny the motion for appointment of counsel, and deny the motion for a preliminary injunction. 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.