Case Name: Piper A. ROUNTREE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Tammy BROWN, Defendant-Appellee, and Harold Clark; John Jabe; Wendy Hobbs; D. Radcliff-Walker; T. Cox; K. Stapleton; D. Carter; P. Soukop; Ms. Swann; S. Horn; V. Booker; Gene Johnson; Ms. Snow; J. Bland, Defendants
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-11-05
Citations: 621 F. App'x 245
Docket Number: No. 15-6655
Parties: Piper A. ROUNTREE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Tammy BROWN, Defendant-Appellee, and Harold Clark; John Jabe; Wendy Hobbs; D. Radcliff-Walker; T. Cox; K. Stapleton; D. Carter; P. Soukop; Ms. Swann; S. Horn; V. Booker; Gene Johnson; Ms. Snow; J. Bland, Defendants.
Judges: Before KING, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. .
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 621
Pages: 245–246

Head Matter:
Piper A. ROUNTREE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Tammy BROWN, Defendant-Appellee, and Harold Clark; John Jabe; Wendy Hobbs; D. Radcliff-Walker; T. Cox; K. Stapleton; D. Carter; P. Soukop; Ms. Swann; S. Horn; V. Booker; Gene Johnson; Ms. Snow; J. Bland, Defendants.
No. 15-6655.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Oct. 30, 2015.
Decided: Nov. 5, 2015.
Piper A. Rountree, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Carson Vorhis, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Kate Elizabeth Dwyre, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, VA, for Appellee.
Before KING, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. .

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Piper A. Rountree appeals the district court's orders denying relief on her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint and her Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e) motion. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Rountree v. Brown, No. 7:11-cv-00572-GEC-RSB (W.D.Va. Mar. 9, 2015; Mar. 26, 2015). We deny Rountree's motion for transcripts at the government's expense and 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.