Case Name: Gregory T. GARY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Charles B. HANNA, Henrico Police Detective, Individual and Official Capacity; Bill Keauker, Police Investigator, Individual and Official Capacity; J.D. Hedrick, HPD Investigator, Individual and Official Capacity; J.W. Ensor, Reporting Officer, Individual and Official Capacity; G.S. Russell, Jr., Review Supervisor, Individual and Official Capacity, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-06-09
Citations: 382 F. App'x 266
Docket Number: No. 10-6487
Parties: Gregory T. GARY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Charles B. HANNA, Henrico Police Detective, Individual and Official Capacity; Bill Keauker, Police Investigator, Individual and Official Capacity; J.D. Hedrick, HPD Investigator, Individual and Official Capacity; J.W. Ensor, Reporting Officer, Individual and Official Capacity; G.S. Russell, Jr., Review Supervisor, Individual and Official Capacity, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 382
Pages: 266–267

Head Matter:
Gregory T. GARY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Charles B. HANNA, Henrico Police Detective, Individual and Official Capacity; Bill Keauker, Police Investigator, Individual and Official Capacity; J.D. Hedrick, HPD Investigator, Individual and Official Capacity; J.W. Ensor, Reporting Officer, Individual and Official Capacity; G.S. Russell, Jr., Review Supervisor, Individual and Official Capacity, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 10-6487.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: June 1, 2010.
Decided: June 9, 2010.
Gregory T. Gary, Appellant Pro Se.
Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Gregory T. Gary appeals the district court's order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(l) (2006) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Gary v. Hanna, No. 2:10-cv-00104-JBF-FBS (E.D.Va. Mar. 23, 2010). We further deny Gary's motion for leave to file an amended complaint. 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.