Case Name: Jabari ZAKIYA, formerly known as Douglas W. Ross, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. USA; Bureau of Prisons; William J. Thompson, Warden; B.A. Bledsoe, Warden; Steven M. Dewalt, Warden, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-05-18
Citations: 180 F. App'x 462
Docket Number: No. 05-1874
Parties: Jabari ZAKIYA, formerly known as Douglas W. Ross, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. USA; Bureau of Prisons; William J. Thompson, Warden; B.A. Bledsoe, Warden; Steven M. Dewalt, Warden, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before LUTTIG and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 180
Pages: 462–462

Head Matter:
Jabari ZAKIYA, formerly known as Douglas W. Ross, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. USA; Bureau of Prisons; William J. Thompson, Warden; B.A. Bledsoe, Warden; Steven M. Dewalt, Warden, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 05-1874.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted April 28, 2006.
Decided May 18, 2006.
Jabari Zakiya, Appellant Pro Se. Daniel W. Dickinson, Jr., Office of the United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia; Brian J. Sonfiled, United States Attorney’s Office, Washington, D.C., for Appellees.
Before LUTTIG and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
Judge Luttig was a member of the original panel but did not participate in this decision. This opinion is filed by a quorum of the panel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 46(d).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Jabari Zakiya appeals the district court's orders dismissing his civil action and denying his motion to reconsider. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Zakiya v. United States, No. CA-04-38-1-IMK (N.D.W.Va. Mar. 18, 2005; July 6, 2005). We deny Zakiya's motion for appointment of counsel. 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.