Case Name: James Bowers JOHNSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America; Department of Justice; Department of the Treasury; Department of Internal Revenue Service; Internal Revenue Service, Defendants-Appellees; James Bowers Johnson, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. United States of America; Department of Justice; Department of the Treasury; Department of Internal Revenue Service, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-10-23
Citations: 621 F. App'x 203
Docket Number: Nos. 15-6886, 15-6887
Parties: James Bowers JOHNSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America; Department of Justice; Department of the Treasury; Department of Internal Revenue Service; Internal Revenue Service, Defendants-Appellees. James Bowers Johnson, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. United States of America; Department of Justice; Department of the Treasury; Department of Internal Revenue Service, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before MOTZ, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 621
Pages: 203–204

Head Matter:
James Bowers JOHNSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America; Department of Justice; Department of the Treasury; Department of Internal Revenue Service; Internal Revenue Service, Defendants-Appellees. James Bowers Johnson, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. United States of America; Department of Justice; Department of the Treasury; Department of Internal Revenue Service, Defendants-Appellees.
Nos. 15-6886, 15-6887.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Oct. 20, 2015.
Decided: Oct. 23, 2015.
James Bowers Johnson, Appellant Pro Se.
Before MOTZ, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
In these consolidated cases, James Bowers Johnson, a federal inmate, appeals the district court's orders dismissing as frivolous Johnson's consolidated civil complaints and denying Johnson's motion for reconsideration of that order. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's orders. See Johnson v. United States, Nos. 7:15-cv-00076-MFU-RSB; 7:15-cv-00067-MFU-RSB, 2015 WL 3949324 (W.D.Va. May 11, 2015 & May 28, 2015). 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.