Case Name: Conrad L. SLOCUMB, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Eileen DELANEY, NP Medical; Sheronda Smith, RN KCI Medical; Dr. Cross, MD KCI Medical; Michael Bejhor, MD SCDC Medical Director; Renee Williams, KCI Mental Health; Clyde Holliday, KCI Mental Health; Jim Page, KCI Mental Health, personal and official capacities, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-04-08
Citations: 422 F. App'x 272
Docket Number: No. 10-6617
Parties: Conrad L. SLOCUMB, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Eileen DELANEY, NP Medical; Sheronda Smith, RN KCI Medical; Dr. Cross, MD KCI Medical; Michael Bejhor, MD SCDC Medical Director; Renee Williams, KCI Mental Health; Clyde Holliday, KCI Mental Health; Jim Page, KCI Mental Health, personal and official capacities, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 422
Pages: 272–273

Head Matter:
Conrad L. SLOCUMB, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Eileen DELANEY, NP Medical; Sheronda Smith, RN KCI Medical; Dr. Cross, MD KCI Medical; Michael Bejhor, MD SCDC Medical Director; Renee Williams, KCI Mental Health; Clyde Holliday, KCI Mental Health; Jim Page, KCI Mental Health, personal and official capacities, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 10-6617.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: March 30, 2011,
Decided: April 8, 2011.
Conrad L. Slocumb, Appellant Pro Se. Janet Brooks Holmes, Daniel Roy Settana, Jr., McKay, Cauthen, Settana & Stubley, PA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Conrad L. Slocumb, a state prisoner, appeals the district court's order dismissing 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. Slocumb v. Delaney, No. 9:09-cv-00458-HMH, 2010 WL 1345270 (D.S.C. Mar. 30, 2010). 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.