Case Name: Robert Andrew BARTLETT, Sr., a/k/a Director, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Ernest HARVIEL, Judge; John Doe, I-X; Jane Smith; Alexa Jordan, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2002-09-05
Citations: 45 F. App'x 269
Docket Number: No. 02-6467
Parties: Robert Andrew BARTLETT, Sr., a/k/a Director, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Ernest HARVIEL, Judge; John Doe, I-X; Jane Smith; Alexa Jordan, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 45
Pages: 269–269

Head Matter:
Robert Andrew BARTLETT, Sr., a/k/a Director, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Ernest HARVIEL, Judge; John Doe, I-X; Jane Smith; Alexa Jordan, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 02-6467.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Aug. 29, 2002.
Decided Sept. 5, 2002.
Robert Andrew Bartlett, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Staci Tolliver Meyer, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina; David Iverson Smith, Alamance County Attorney’s Office, Graham, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Robert Andrew Bartlett, Sr., appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the magistrate judge's recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Bartlett v. Harviel, No. CA-00-241-1 (M.D.N.C. Feb. 26, 2002). 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.