Case Name: Jarice ROYAL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BHAGIRDATH, Sergeant, Supervisor; M.K. Riggan, Lieutenant; Lansen, MJO; P. Williams, Ms., MJO; P.L.P. Robbins, Ms./Mr.; Captain Hatchett, Ms.; ASS, Ms./Mr.; M. Pollard, Superintendent, Lt. Col.; Sergeant Johnson, Mr.; E. Taylor, Major, Mr.; Johnson, MJO, Mr.; Murphy, MJO, Mr.; Madison, Sergeant, Mr.; Immanuel, Nurse, Ms., Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-07-30
Citations: 389 F. App'x 324
Docket Number: No. 10-6066
Parties: Jarice ROYAL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BHAGIRDATH, Sergeant, Supervisor; M.K. Riggan, Lieutenant; Lansen, MJO; P. Williams, Ms., MJO; P.L.P. Robbins, Ms./Mr.; Captain Hatchett, Ms.; ASS, Ms./Mr.; M. Pollard, Superintendent, Lt. Col.; Sergeant Johnson, Mr.; E. Taylor, Major, Mr.; Johnson, MJO, Mr.; Murphy, MJO, Mr.; Madison, Sergeant, Mr.; Immanuel, Nurse, Ms., Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and •SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 389
Pages: 324–324

Head Matter:
Jarice ROYAL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BHAGIRDATH, Sergeant, Supervisor; M.K. Riggan, Lieutenant; Lansen, MJO; P. Williams, Ms., MJO; P.L.P. Robbins, Ms./Mr.; Captain Hatchett, Ms.; ASS, Ms./Mr.; M. Pollard, Superintendent, Lt. Col.; Sergeant Johnson, Mr.; E. Taylor, Major, Mr.; Johnson, MJO, Mr.; Murphy, MJO, Mr.; Madison, Sergeant, Mr.; Immanuel, Nurse, Ms., Defendants-Appellees.
No. 10-6066.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 22, 2010.
Decided: July 30, 2010.
Jarice Royal, Appellant Pro Se.
Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and •SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Jarice Royal appeals the district court's order 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. Royal v. Bhagirdath, No. l:09-cv-00835-GBL-JFA (E.D.Va. Dec. 11, 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.