Case Name: Momolu V.S. SIRLEAF, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Eddie PEARSON, sued individually and in official capacity; Jarratt, Colonel, sued individually and in official capacity, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-09-20
Citations: 697 F. App'x 221
Docket Number: No. 17-6273
Parties: Momolu V.S. SIRLEAF, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Eddie PEARSON, sued individually and in official capacity; Jarratt, Colonel, sued individually and in official capacity, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 697
Pages: 221–221

Head Matter:
Momolu V.S. SIRLEAF, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Eddie PEARSON, sued individually and in official capacity; Jarratt, Colonel, sued individually and in official capacity, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 17-6273
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: August 28, 2017
Decided: September 20, 2017
Momolu V.S. Sirleaf, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Jessica Leigh Berdichevsky, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Ap-pellees.
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Momolu V.S. Sirleaf, Jr., appeals the district court's order granting summary judgment to the Defendants and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Sirleaf v. Pearson, No. 3:15-cv-00301-MHL-RCY, 2017 WL 655173 (E.D. Va. Feb. 16, 2017). 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