Case Name: Scott M. BOGER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Gene M. JOHNSON; John Jabe; John Garman; D.A. Braxton; S.W. Hollar; Lieutenant S.L. Sampson; T. Hostetter; R. Willis; Jane Doe # 1; John Doe # 2; John Doe# 3, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-07-07
Citations: 438 F. App'x 167
Docket Number: No. 11-6006
Parties: Scott M. BOGER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Gene M. JOHNSON; John Jabe; John Garman; D.A. Braxton; S.W. Hollar; Lieutenant S.L. Sampson; T. Hostetter; R. Willis; Jane Doe # 1; John Doe # 2; John Doe# 3, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 438
Pages: 167–168

Head Matter:
Scott M. BOGER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Gene M. JOHNSON; John Jabe; John Garman; D.A. Braxton; S.W. Hollar; Lieutenant S.L. Sampson; T. Hostetter; R. Willis; Jane Doe # 1; John Doe # 2; John Doe# 3, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 11-6006.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: June 23, 2011.
Decided: July 7, 2011.
Scott M. Boger, Appellant Pro Se. John Michael Parsons, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
Before MOTZ, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Scott M. Boger appeals the district court's order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) action and denying his motion to add a party and the court's order denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Boger v. Johnson, No. 7:10-cv-00194-sgw-mfu, 2010 WL 5174364 (W.D.Va. Dec. 15, 2010); (Jan. 14, 2011). 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.