Case Name: Michael A. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Marshal GRIFFIN; Officer Fox; Officer Gray; Officer Alperstein; Officer Anderson; Officer Clark; Joseph M. Lightsey; Madonna Godwin, Nurse; Steve Dolinski, Head Director of Nursing, Defendants-Appellees, Joseph M. Lightsey; Madonna Godwin, Nurse; Steve Dolinski, Head Director of Nursing, Defendants
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-06-19
Citations: 474 F. App'x 188
Docket Number: No. 12-6384
Parties: Michael A. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Marshal GRIFFIN; Officer Fox; Officer Gray; Officer Alperstein; Officer Anderson; Officer Clark; Joseph M. Lightsey; Madonna Godwin, Nurse; Steve Dolinski, Head Director of Nursing, Defendants-Appellees, Joseph M. Lightsey; Madonna Godwin, Nurse; Steve Dolinski, Head Director of Nursing, Defendants.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 474
Pages: 188–189

Head Matter:
Michael A. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Marshal GRIFFIN; Officer Fox; Officer Gray; Officer Alperstein; Officer Anderson; Officer Clark; Joseph M. Lightsey; Madonna Godwin, Nurse; Steve Dolinski, Head Director of Nursing, Defendants-Appellees, Joseph M. Lightsey; Madonna Godwin, Nurse; Steve Dolinski, Head Director of Nursing, Defendants.
No. 12-6384.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: June 14, 2012.
Decided: June 19, 2012.
Michael Antwon Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth F. Parsons, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina; Elizabeth Pharr McCullough, Kelly Elizabeth Street, Young, Moore & Henderson, PA, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appel-lees.
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Michael A. Williams 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. Williams v. Griffin, No. 5:10-ct-03122-FL (E.D.N.C. Feb. 22, 2012). 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.