Case Name: Perry E. THORNLEY, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Ruffus FLEMMING, Regional Director; Hinckle, Chief Warden GRCC; Dugger, Corporal, Corrections Officer, GRCC, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-05-20
Citations: 96 F. App'x 922
Docket Number: No. 04-6604
Parties: Perry E. THORNLEY, Jr., Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Ruffus FLEMMING, Regional Director; Hinckle, Chief Warden GRCC; Dugger, Corporal, Corrections Officer, GRCC, Defendants—Appellees.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 96
Pages: 922–922

Head Matter:
Perry E. THORNLEY, Jr., Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Ruffus FLEMMING, Regional Director; Hinckle, Chief Warden GRCC; Dugger, Corporal, Corrections Officer, GRCC, Defendants—Appellees.
No. 04-6604.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: May 13, 2004.
Decided: May 20, 2004.
Perry E. Thornley, Jr., Appellant pro se.
William W. Muse, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Perry E. Thornley, Jr., appeals the magistrate judge's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the magistrate judge. See Thornley v. Flemming, No. CA-03-419-3 (E.D.Va. Mar. 25, 2004). 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
The parties consented to the jurisdiction of a magistrate judge under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2000).