Case Name: Harry James CASCIO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. State of MARYLAND; Government of Baltimore County; Norris Byrnes, Retired Judge; Karen Jones, Ms., Esq.; Joe Asensio, Mr., Esq., Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-04-02
Citations: 372 F. App'x 368
Docket Number: No. 09-7843
Parties: Harry James CASCIO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. State of MARYLAND; Government of Baltimore County; Norris Byrnes, Retired Judge; Karen Jones, Ms., Esq.; Joe Asensio, Mr., Esq., Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 372
Pages: 368–368

Head Matter:
Harry James CASCIO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. State of MARYLAND; Government of Baltimore County; Norris Byrnes, Retired Judge; Karen Jones, Ms., Esq.; Joe Asensio, Mr., Esq., Defendants-Appellees.
No. 09-7843.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: March 30, 2010.
Decided: April 2, 2010.
Harry James Cascio, Appellant Pro Se.
Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Harry James Cascio 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. Cascio v. State of Maryland, No. 8:09-cv-01938-RWT, 2009 WL 2913485 (D.Md. Sept. 2, 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.