Case Name: Timothy GRIMES, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. R. FOWLER; G. Johnson; W.P. True; John Does, Officials of ROSP; Captain Hockett; W. Smith; M. Buchanan; J. Bentley; John Does, Officials of WRSP; John Does, Practitioners ROSP; Jean Does, Red Onion State Prison; Sergeant Head; Prison Guard Bowen; Correctional Officer Owens, Defendants-Appellees, and T. Johnson; A. Baker, Defendants
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-07-21
Citations: 102 F. App'x 807
Docket Number: No. 04-6209
Parties: Timothy GRIMES, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. R. FOWLER; G. Johnson; W.P. True; John Does, Officials of ROSP; Captain Hockett; W. Smith; M. Buchanan; J. Bentley; John Does, Officials of WRSP; John Does, Practitioners ROSP; Jean Does, Red Onion State Prison; Sergeant Head; Prison Guard Bowen; Correctional Officer Owens, Defendants—Appellees, and T. Johnson; A. Baker, Defendants.
Judges: Before MOTZ, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 102
Pages: 807–808

Head Matter:
Timothy GRIMES, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. R. FOWLER; G. Johnson; W.P. True; John Does, Officials of ROSP; Captain Hockett; W. Smith; M. Buchanan; J. Bentley; John Does, Officials of WRSP; John Does, Practitioners ROSP; Jean Does, Red Onion State Prison; Sergeant Head; Prison Guard Bowen; Correctional Officer Owens, Defendants—Appellees, and T. Johnson; A. Baker, Defendants.
No. 04-6209.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 15, 2004.
Decided: July 21, 2004.
Timothy Grimes, Appellant pro se.
Susan Foster Barr, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia; Alexander Leonard Taylor, Jr., Office of the United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia; Gary Clay Hancock, Timothy Edmond Kirtner, Gilmer, Sadler, Ingram, Sutherland & Hutton, Pulaski, Virginia, for Appellees.
Before MOTZ, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Timothy Grimes appeals the district court's order granting judgment in favor of the Appellees in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) action in accordance with a jury verdict. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. See Grimes v. Fowler, No. CA-01-526-2 (W.D.Va. Jan. 23, 2004). 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