Case Name: William MARROW-EL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES, INC., John Doe, M.D. Physician; John Doe, M.D.; John Doe, M.D. Supervisor/Physician; John Doe, M.D. Physician Assistant; Moss, M.D. Physician; John Doe, Health Administrator/Supervisor, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-12-27
Citations: 501 F. App'x 304
Docket Number: No. 12-7375
Parties: William MARROW-EL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES, INC., John Doe, M.D. Physician; John Doe, M.D.; John Doe, M.D. Supervisor/Physician; John Doe, M.D. Physician Assistant; Moss, M.D. Physician; John Doe, Health Administrator/Supervisor, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 501
Pages: 304–305

Head Matter:
William MARROW-EL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES, INC., John Doe, M.D. Physician; John Doe, M.D.; John Doe, M.D. Supervisor/Physician; John Doe, M.D. Physician Assistant; Moss, M.D. Physician; John Doe, Health Administrator/Supervisor, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 12-7375.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Dec. 20, 2012.
Decided: Dec. 27, 2012.
William Marrow-El, Appellant Pro Se. Philip Melton Andrews, Mary Elizabeth Smith, Karmon & Graham, PA, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
Before KING 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
William Marrow-El appeals the district court's orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint and motion to reconsider. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Marrow-El v. Corr. Med. Servs., No. 1:11-cv-00221-JFM (D. Md. Nov. 16, 2011 & Aug. 8, 2012). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED.