Case Name: Gilbert L. SPURLOCK, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BANK OF AMERICA; David Saunders, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-06-26
Citations: 188 F. App'x 171
Docket Number: No. 06-1049
Parties: Gilbert L. SPURLOCK, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. BANK OF AMERICA; David Saunders, Defendants—Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 188
Pages: 171–171

Head Matter:
Gilbert L. SPURLOCK, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. BANK OF AMERICA; David Saunders, Defendants—Appellees.
No. 06-1049.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: May 31, 2006.
Decided: June 26, 2006.
Gilbert L. Spurlock, Appellant Pro Se. John F. McCuskey, Christopher James Sears, Shuman, McCuskey & Slicer, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellees.
Before MICHAEL, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Gilbert L. Spurlock appeals the district court's orders accepting the report and recommendation of a magistrate judge and dismissing his civil complaint for lack of jurisdiction and denying his motion to remand. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm because the district court correctly concluded that it lacked jurisdiction to either entertain the merits of Spurlock's complaint or remand the case to state court. See Spurlock v. Bank of America, No. CA-04-1193 (S.D.W.Va. Dec. 2 and Dec. 13, 2005). We deny Spurlock's motion for appointment of counsel. 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.