Case Name: Larry WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Officer ROBERTSON; Warden McCall; Major Bush; Caroline Lindsey, Staff Attorney; Lt. Williams; Lt. Earl; Capt. Absten; Capt. Tich; Debra Barnwell; Mr. Jon Ozmint, Director; Stephen Clayton, Warden, Defendants-ppellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-12-13
Citations: 404 F. App'x 783
Docket Number: No. 10-6204
Parties: Larry WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Officer ROBERTSON; Warden McCall; Major Bush; Caroline Lindsey, Staff Attorney; Lt. Williams; Lt. Earl; Capt. Absten; Capt. Tich; Debra Barnwell; Mr. Jon Ozmint, Director; Stephen Clayton, Warden, Defendants-ppellees.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 404
Pages: 783–783

Head Matter:
Larry WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Officer ROBERTSON; Warden McCall; Major Bush; Caroline Lindsey, Staff Attorney; Lt. Williams; Lt. Earl; Capt. Absten; Capt. Tich; Debra Barnwell; Mr. Jon Ozmint, Director; Stephen Clayton, Warden, Defendants-ppellees.
No. 10-6204.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Nov. 12, 2010.
Decided: Dec. 13, 2010.
Larry Williams, Appellant Pro Se. James Victor McDade, Doyle, O’Rourke, Tate & McDade, PA, Anderson, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Vacated and remanded by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Larry Williams, a South Carolina inmate, appeals the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. Relying on Riley v. Dorton, 115 F.3d 1159, 1168 (4th Cir.1997), Norman v. Taylor, 25 F.3d 1259 (4th Cir.1994), and related cases, the district court granted Defendants' motion for summary judgment, based on the finding that Williams' alleged injuries were too de minimis to establish a claim for excessive force. Following the district court's opinion, however, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Wilkins v. Gaddy, — U.S.-, 130 S.Ct. 1175, 175 L.Ed.2d 995 (2010), which abrogated our decisions in Riley and Norman. Thus, we vacate the district court's opinion and remand for proceedings consistent with the Supreme Court's opinion in Wilkins.' We deny Williams' motions for appointment of counsel as moot and 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.
VACATED AND REMANDED.
In so remanding, we find no fault by the district court, which followed extant circuit precedent.