Case Name: Linwood E. MOORING, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY; Robbie Hudson, official capacity; Earnie Marshaburn, official capacity; Joe Norris, official capacity; Woody Bolton, official capacity; Gloria Schwartz, official capacity; Paula Hutchinson, official capacity; Roger Nobles, official capacity; Arthur G. Howell, Jr., official capacity, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2002-12-19
Citations: 53 F. App'x 250
Docket Number: No. 02-1911
Parties: Linwood E. MOORING, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY; Robbie Hudson, official capacity; Earnie Marshaburn, official capacity; Joe Norris, official capacity; Woody Bolton, official capacity; Gloria Schwartz, official capacity; Paula Hutchinson, official capacity; Roger Nobles, official capacity; Arthur G. Howell, Jr., official capacity, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 53
Pages: 250–251

Head Matter:
Linwood E. MOORING, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY; Robbie Hudson, official capacity; Earnie Marshaburn, official capacity; Joe Norris, official capacity; Woody Bolton, official capacity; Gloria Schwartz, official capacity; Paula Hutchinson, official capacity; Roger Nobles, official capacity; Arthur G. Howell, Jr., official capacity, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 02-1911.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Dec. 16, 2002.
Decided Dec. 19, 2002.
Linwood E. Mooring, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Oregon Lawton, III, Associate Attorney General, Celia Grasty Lata, Office of the Attorney General of North Carolina, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Before LUTTIG, MICHAEL, and DIANA GRIBBON MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Linwood E. Mooring appeals the district court's order dismissing his civil rights claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, 1985, 1986, 1988 (2000), his criminal conspiracy claims under 18 U.S.C. § 241, 242 (2000), and his Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) claims under 18 U.S.C. § 1961-1962 (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Mooring v. East Carolina Univ., No. CA-02-624H(3) (E.D.N.C. Aug. 6, 2002). 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.