Case Name: Bartola J. PACETTI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michael J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security Administration; Mary Holt, Defendants-Appellees, and Mark S. Millard, Judge; Alan Carlson; State of California Office of Attorney General; Kathy Ricci, Defendants
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-01-02
Citations: 504 F. App'x 217
Docket Number: No. 12-2057
Parties: Bartola J. PACETTI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michael J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security Administration; Mary Holt, Defendants-Appellees, and Mark S. Millard, Judge; Alan Carlson; State of California Office of Attorney General; Kathy Ricci, Defendants.
Judges: Before DAVIS, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 504
Pages: 217–217

Head Matter:
Bartola J. PACETTI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michael J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security Administration; Mary Holt, Defendants-Appellees, and Mark S. Millard, Judge; Alan Carlson; State of California Office of Attorney General; Kathy Ricci, Defendants.
No. 12-2057.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Dec. 13, 2012.
Decided: Jan. 2, 2013.
Bartola J. Pacetti, Appellant Pro Se. Julie Ann Edelstein, Office of the United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellees.
Before DAVIS, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Bartola J. Pacetti appeals the district court's orders granting Appellees' motion to dismiss and dismissing his civil action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pau-peris, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Pacetti v. Millard, No. 1:11-cv-01293-LO-TCB (E.D.Va. Mar. 27, 2012 & filed Aug. 22, 2012, entered Aug. 23, 2012). We deny Pacetti's motion for a transcript at government expense. 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.