Case Name: Charles R. MAJOR, Jr., a/k/a Charles R. Major, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Mr. Mike RAYMOND, sued individually and in working capacity; Housing Authority of the City of Greenville; Ms. Marian Todd, sued individually and in working capacity, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-06-04
Citations: 522 F. App'x 186
Docket Number: No. 12-2457
Parties: Charles R. MAJOR, Jr., a/k/a Charles R. Major, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Mr. Mike RAYMOND, sued individually and in working capacity; Housing Authority of the City of Greenville; Ms. Marian Todd, sued individually and in working capacity, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before SHEDD, DIAZ, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 522
Pages: 186–186

Head Matter:
Charles R. MAJOR, Jr., a/k/a Charles R. Major, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Mr. Mike RAYMOND, sued individually and in working capacity; Housing Authority of the City of Greenville; Ms. Marian Todd, sued individually and in working capacity, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 12-2457.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: May 30, 2013.
Decided: June 4, 2013.
Charles R. Major, Appellant Pro Se. Emily T. Whitney, Devlin & Parkinson, PA, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appel-lees.
Before SHEDD, DIAZ, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Charles R. Major, Jr., appeals the district court's orders adopting the magistrate judge's recommendation and dismissing his civil complaint, and denying his subsequent motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Major v. Raymond, No. 6:12-cv-00183-GRA (D.S.C. Sept. 28, 2012; Oct. 23, 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.