Case Name: Judson WITHAM, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DEC NEW YORK State; State of New York; Andrew Cuomo, Governor; Basil Seggos, Commissioner DEC; Unknown John and Jane Doe's Agents; Employees for the New York State; 1-10 Bivens Action; Warren County, New York; NYS DEC; The Lake George Park Commission; New York State Conservation Com, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-10-23
Citations: 699 F. App'x 233
Docket Number: No. 17-1791
Parties: Judson WITHAM, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DEC NEW YORK State; State of New York; Andrew Cuomo, Governor; Basil Seggos, Commissioner DEC; Unknown John and Jane Doe’s Agents; Employees for the New York State; 1-10 Bivens Action; Warren County, New York; NYS DEC; The Lake George Park Commission; New York State Conservation Com, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 699
Pages: 233–233

Head Matter:
Judson WITHAM, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DEC NEW YORK State; State of New York; Andrew Cuomo, Governor; Basil Seggos, Commissioner DEC; Unknown John and Jane Doe’s Agents; Employees for the New York State; 1-10 Bivens Action; Warren County, New York; NYS DEC; The Lake George Park Commission; New York State Conservation Com, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 17-1791
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: October 19, 2017
Decided: October 23, 2017
Judson Witham, Appellant Pro Se.
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Judson Witham appeals the district court's order dismissing pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012), his civil complaint in which he asserted claims against various New York individuals and entities arising out of their construction, operation, and maintenance of dams, resulting in the destruction of lakes and land, including Witham's family's property and marina. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Witham v. DEC New York State, No. 5:17-cv-00171-BO (E.D.N.C. May 31, 2017). We deny Witham's motion for 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