Case Name: Merle T. RUTLEDGE, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF NORFOLK, VIRGINIA; City Of Norfolk Police Department; N.E. Karangelen, Officer, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-12-23
Citations: 358 F. App'x 409
Docket Number: No. 09-1898
Parties: Merle T. RUTLEDGE, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF NORFOLK, VIRGINIA; City Of Norfolk Police Department; N.E. Karangelen, Officer, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 358
Pages: 409–409

Head Matter:
Merle T. RUTLEDGE, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF NORFOLK, VIRGINIA; City Of Norfolk Police Department; N.E. Karangelen, Officer, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 09-1898.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Dec. 17, 2009.
Decided: Dec. 23, 2009.
Merle T. Rutledge, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Andrew Richard Fox, Assistant City Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellees.
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Merle T. Rutledge, Jr., appeals the district court's order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint for failure to state a claim. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Rutledge v. City of Norfolk, No. 2:09-cv-00129-MSD-JEB (E.D. Va. filed July 30; entered July 31, 2009). 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.