Case Name: Willie Junior HINES, a/k/a Willie Hines, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Chad ROBINSON; Adetoro Sobowale; Amy Enloe; Terri Comp; Dave Tatarsky; Michael Laubshire; Robert Ward; Warden McCall; Timothy P. Close; W.J. Bayard; John Doe, Kirkland Medical Institution, Defendants-Appellees, and Kirkland Jane Doe Medical; Steven M. Pruitt; SCDC; Coach Robinson; MD Image Care LLC, Defendants
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-09-03
Citations: 539 F. App'x 138
Docket Number: No. 13-6484
Parties: Willie Junior HINES, a/k/a Willie Hines, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Chad ROBINSON; Adetoro Sobowale; Amy Enloe; Terri Comp; Dave Tatarsky; Michael Laubshire; Robert Ward; Warden McCall; Timothy P. Close; W.J. Bayard; John Doe, Kirkland Medical Institution, Defendants-Appellees, and Kirkland Jane Doe Medical; Steven M. Pruitt; SCDC; Coach Robinson; MD Image Care LLC, Defendants.
Judges: Before DUNCAN, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 539
Pages: 138–139

Head Matter:
Willie Junior HINES, a/k/a Willie Hines, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Chad ROBINSON; Adetoro Sobowale; Amy Enloe; Terri Comp; Dave Tatarsky; Michael Laubshire; Robert Ward; Warden McCall; Timothy P. Close; W.J. Bayard; John Doe, Kirkland Medical Institution, Defendants-Appellees, and Kirkland Jane Doe Medical; Steven M. Pruitt; SCDC; Coach Robinson; MD Image Care LLC, Defendants.
No. 13-6484.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Aug. 29, 2013.
Decided: Sept. 3, 2013.
Willie Junior Hines, Appellant Pro Se. Nathaniel Heyward Clarkson, III, Clark-son Walsh Terrell & Coulter, PA, Green-ville, South Carolina; Shelton Webber Haile, Richardson, Plowden & Robinson, PA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appel-lees.
Before DUNCAN, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Willie Junior Hines appeals the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1988 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Hines' motion for appointment of counsel and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Hines v. Robinson, No. 6:12-cv-01834-GRA (D.S.C. Mar. 12, 2018). 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.