Case Name: Bernard A. TENSLEY-BEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Doctor ULEP; Jo Ann McCarthy, Defendants-Appellees, and Commonwealth of Virginia; Virginia Department of Corrections; Medical Health Services, Defendants
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2002-09-19
Citations: 46 F. App'x 181
Docket Number: No. 02-6636
Parties: Bernard A. TENSLEY-BEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Doctor ULEP; Jo Ann McCarthy, Defendants-Appellees, and Commonwealth of Virginia; Virginia Department of Corrections; Medical Health Services, Defendants.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 46
Pages: 181–181

Head Matter:
Bernard A. TENSLEY-BEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Doctor ULEP; Jo Ann McCarthy, Defendants-Appellees, and Commonwealth of Virginia; Virginia Department of Corrections; Medical Health Services, Defendants.
No. 02-6636.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Aug. 16, 2002.
Decided Sept. 19, 2002.
Bernard A. Tensley-Bey, Appellant Pro Se. John David McChesney, Coreen Antoinette Bromfield, Rawls & McNelis, P.C., Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Bernard A. Tensley-Bey appeals the district court's orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp.2002) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and orders and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Tensley-Bey v. Virginia, No. CA-00-1449 AM (E.D. Va. filed Nov. 27, 2000, entered Nov. 28, 2000; filed Apr. 9, 2002, entered Apr. 10, 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.