Case Name: Paul A. LOVINGS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Randall C. MATHENA, Warden of Red Onion State Prison; Officer D.C. Dupie; Officer J.L. Dooley; Sergeant Barton; Sergeant L. Collins; Sergeant Tohia Phillips; Sergeant B.P. Meade; Lieutenant Day; Lieutenant T.G. Lyall; Unit Manager W.G. Swiney; Nurse Ms. Clark; Officer R.J. Sluss; Lieutenant James D. Lambert; Counselor S.M. Mullins, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-11-20
Citations: 622 F. App'x 286
Docket Number: No. 15-7057
Parties: Paul A. LOVINGS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Randall C. MATHENA, Warden of Red Onion State Prison; Officer D.C. Dupie; Officer J.L. Dooley; Sergeant Barton; Sergeant L. Collins; Sergeant Tohia Phillips; Sergeant B.P. Meade; Lieutenant Day; Lieutenant T.G. Lyall; Unit Manager W.G. Swiney; Nurse Ms. Clark; Officer R.J. Sluss; Lieutenant James D. Lambert; Counselor S.M. Mullins, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 622
Pages: 286–287

Head Matter:
Paul A. LOVINGS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Randall C. MATHENA, Warden of Red Onion State Prison; Officer D.C. Dupie; Officer J.L. Dooley; Sergeant Barton; Sergeant L. Collins; Sergeant Tohia Phillips; Sergeant B.P. Meade; Lieutenant Day; Lieutenant T.G. Lyall; Unit Manager W.G. Swiney; Nurse Ms. Clark; Officer R.J. Sluss; Lieutenant James D. Lambert; Counselor S.M. Mullins, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 15-7057.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Nov. 17, 2015.
Decided: Nov. 20, 2015.
Paul A. Lovings, Appellant Pro Se. Margaret Hoehl O’Shea, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Paul A. Lovings appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Lovings v. Mathena, No. 7:14-cv-00359-JLK-RSB, 2015 WL 3827722 (W.D.Va. June 19, 2015). 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.