Case Name: Owaiian M. JONES, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR WESTERN DISTRICT; Michael F. Urbanski; James Jones; Robert S. Ballou; Roanoke City Circuit Court; Roanoke City General District Court; Roanoke City Juvenile Domestic Relations Court, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-02-19
Citations: 593 F. App'x 250
Docket Number: No. 14-7486
Parties: Owaiian M. JONES, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR WESTERN DISTRICT; Michael F. Urbanski; James Jones; Robert S. Ballou; Roanoke City Circuit Court; Roanoke City General District Court; Roanoke City Juvenile Domestic Relations Court, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before MOTZ, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 593
Pages: 250–250

Head Matter:
Owaiian M. JONES, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR WESTERN DISTRICT; Michael F. Urbanski; James Jones; Robert S. Ballou; Roanoke City Circuit Court; Roanoke City General District Court; Roanoke City Juvenile Domestic Relations Court, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 14-7486.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Feb. 12, 2015.
Decided: Feb. 19, 2015.
Owaiian M. Jones, Appellant Pro Se.
Before MOTZ, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Owaiian Jones appeals the district court's order dismissing his complaint seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012), and Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Jones v. United States Dist. Ct. for the W. Dist. of Va., No. 7:14-cv-00499-GEC (WD.Va. Sept. 30, 2014). 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.