Case Name: Luis ROSARIO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Doctor UMESI, Doctor in Wake County Jail; Sergeant Long, Staff Member, Wake County Jail; Mr. Poncelet, Staff Member, Wake County Jail, Defendants-Appellees, and Donnie Harrison, Wake County Sheriff; Mr. Gunter, Wake County Jail Director; Wake County Sheriff's Office, Defendants
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-12-30
Citations: 359 F. App'x 383
Docket Number: No. 09-7705
Parties: Luis ROSARIO, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Doctor UMESI, Doctor in Wake County Jail; Sergeant Long, Staff Member, Wake County Jail; Mr. Poncelet, Staff Member, Wake County Jail, Defendants—Appellees, and Donnie Harrison, Wake County Sheriff; Mr. Gunter, Wake County Jail Director; Wake County Sheriff’s Office, Defendants.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 359
Pages: 383–384

Head Matter:
Luis ROSARIO, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Doctor UMESI, Doctor in Wake County Jail; Sergeant Long, Staff Member, Wake County Jail; Mr. Poncelet, Staff Member, Wake County Jail, Defendants—Appellees, and Donnie Harrison, Wake County Sheriff; Mr. Gunter, Wake County Jail Director; Wake County Sheriff’s Office, Defendants.
No. 09-7705.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Dec. 17, 2009.
Decided: Dec. 30, 2009.
Luis Rosario, Appellant Pro Se. John Albert Maxfield, County Attorney’s Office for the County of Wake, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Luis Rosario appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Rosario v. Wake County Sheriff's Office, No. 5:07-ct-03171-BO (E.D.N.C. Sept. 1, 2009). 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.