Case Name: Edward W. JEFFERSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Warden Frank BISHOP; M. Northcraft; James Tichnell; B. McKenzie; Paula R. Williams; Ms. Gordon; Eric Rounds; Jeff Nines, Ccms; R. Davis, Ccms II; Sgt. Shimko, Coordinator; Scott Oakley, Execution Director; Major Denny Mellott; Captain Hines; Dr. Jack Cunning, School Principal; Lt. A.J. Lee; State of Md., Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-04-29
Citations: 519 F. App'x 209
Docket Number: No. 12-8163
Parties: Edward W. JEFFERSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Warden Frank BISHOP; M. Northcraft; James Tichnell; B. McKenzie; Paula R. Williams; Ms. Gordon; Eric Rounds; Jeff Nines, Ccms; R. Davis, Ccms II; Sgt. Shimko, Coordinator; Scott Oakley, Execution Director; Major Denny Mellott; Captain Hines; Dr. Jack Cunning, School Principal; Lt. A.J. Lee; State of Md., Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before AGEE and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 519
Pages: 209–210

Head Matter:
Edward W. JEFFERSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Warden Frank BISHOP; M. Northcraft; James Tichnell; B. McKenzie; Paula R. Williams; Ms. Gordon; Eric Rounds; Jeff Nines, Ccms; R. Davis, Ccms II; Sgt. Shimko, Coordinator; Scott Oakley, Execution Director; Major Denny Mellott; Captain Hines; Dr. Jack Cunning, School Principal; Lt. A.J. Lee; State of Md., Defendants-Appellees.
No. 12-8163.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: April 25, 2013.
Decided: April 29, 2013.
Edward W. Jefferson, Appellant Pro Se.
Before AGEE and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Edward W. Jefferson 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. Jefferson v. Bishop, No. 1:12-cv-03497-JFM (D.Md. Dec. 7, 2012). We dispense with 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.