Case Name: Stuart Wayne TOMPKINS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. David MITCHELL, Superintendent at Mountain View Correctional Inst.; John Doe Black, Mailroom Officer at Mountain View Correctional Inst.; Paul Taylor, Assist. Superintendent of Programs at Mountain View Correctional Inst.; Mike Slagle, at Lumberton Correctional Inst.; Sharon Frazer, Program Supervisor at Lumberton Correctional Inst.; John/Jane Doe, Supervisor, Mailroom at Mountain View Correctional Inst.; Steve T. Bailey, Director at Department of Corrections, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-10-05
Citations: 449 F. App'x 278
Docket Number: No. 11-6856
Parties: Stuart Wayne TOMPKINS, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. David MITCHELL, Superintendent at Mountain View Correctional Inst.; John Doe Black, Mailroom Officer at Mountain View Correctional Inst.; Paul Taylor, Assist. Superintendent of Programs at Mountain View Correctional Inst.; Mike Slagle, at Lumberton Correctional Inst.; Sharon Frazer, Program Supervisor at Lumberton Correctional Inst.; John/Jane Doe, Su pervisor, Mailroom at Mountain View Correctional Inst.; Steve T. Bailey, Director at Department of Corrections, Defendants—Appellees.
Judges: Before KING, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 449
Pages: 278–279

Head Matter:
Stuart Wayne TOMPKINS, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. David MITCHELL, Superintendent at Mountain View Correctional Inst.; John Doe Black, Mailroom Officer at Mountain View Correctional Inst.; Paul Taylor, Assist. Superintendent of Programs at Mountain View Correctional Inst.; Mike Slagle, at Lumberton Correctional Inst.; Sharon Frazer, Program Supervisor at Lumberton Correctional Inst.; John/Jane Doe, Su pervisor, Mailroom at Mountain View Correctional Inst.; Steve T. Bailey, Director at Department of Corrections, Defendants—Appellees.
No. 11-6856.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Sept. 29, 2011.
Decided: Oct. 5, 2011.
Stuart Wayne Tompkins, Appellant Pro Se.
Before KING, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Stuart Wayne Tompkins appeals the district court's orders denying relief on his complaint and numerous post-judgment motions in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Tompkins v. Mitchell, No. 1:10-cv-00186-RJC, 2010 WL 4027773 (W.D.N.C. Oct. 14) & 2010 WL 5441668 (Dec. 28, 2010) & (June 22, 2011). We deny Tompkins' motion to compel and 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.