Case Name: Stuart Wayne TOMPKINS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Superintendent Sandra THOMAS, Department of Correction; Kenneth Hunt; Colbert L. Respass; David W. Keys; J. Haynes; William Basnight, III; Hattie B. Pimpong; Pamela J. Locklear; Rose Locklear; Billie J. Weaver; John Doe Locklear; Clifton Sutton; Paul Taylor; John Doe Hunt, Assistant Superintendent; Lynn Henry; John Doe Hunt, Sergeant; John/Jane Doe, Transfer Coordinator; Jane Doe; John Doe, Captain; M.C. Locklear; John Doe, Director Classification Committee; George Boysden; Marshall Pike, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-09-13
Citations: 478 F. App'x 31
Docket Number: No. 12-6723
Parties: Stuart Wayne TOMPKINS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Superintendent Sandra THOMAS, Department of Correction; Kenneth Hunt; Colbert L. Respass; David W. Keys; J. Haynes; William Basnight, III; Hattie B. Pimpong; Pamela J. Locklear; Rose Locklear; Billie J. Weaver; John Doe Locklear; Clifton Sutton; Paul Taylor; John Doe Hunt, Assistant Superintendent; Lynn Henry; John Doe Hunt, Sergeant; John/Jane Doe, Transfer Coordinator; Jane Doe; John Doe, Captain; M.C. Locklear; John Doe, Director Classification Committee; George Boysden; Marshall Pike, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 478
Pages: 31–31

Head Matter:
Stuart Wayne TOMPKINS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Superintendent Sandra THOMAS, Department of Correction; Kenneth Hunt; Colbert L. Respass; David W. Keys; J. Haynes; William Basnight, III; Hattie B. Pimpong; Pamela J. Locklear; Rose Locklear; Billie J. Weaver; John Doe Locklear; Clifton Sutton; Paul Taylor; John Doe Hunt, Assistant Superintendent; Lynn Henry; John Doe Hunt, Sergeant; John/Jane Doe, Transfer Coordinator; Jane Doe; John Doe, Captain; M.C. Locklear; John Doe, Director Classification Committee; George Boysden; Marshall Pike, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 12-6723.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Sept. 11, 2012.
Decided: Sept. 13, 2012.
Stuart Wayne Tompkins, Appellant Pro Se.
Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Stuart Wayne Tompkins appeals the district court's orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Tompkins v. Thomas, No. 5:11-ct-03049-D (E.D.N.C. Nov. 7, 2011 & Apr. 5, 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.