Case Name: Waldo FENNER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF DURHAM/BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-07-29
Citations: 535 F. App'x 314
Docket Number: No. 13-1437
Parties: Waldo FENNER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF DURHAM/BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before GREGORY, DAVIS, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 535
Pages: 314–314

Head Matter:
Waldo FENNER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF DURHAM/BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 13-1437.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 25, 2013.
Decided: July 29, 2013.
Waldo Fenner, Appellant Pro Se. Emmanuel Dubois McGirt, City Attorney’s Office, Durham, North Carolina, for Appel-lee.
Before GREGORY, DAVIS, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER. CURIAM:
Waldo Fenner appeals the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on Fenner's 42 U.S.C. § 1983, 1985, 1986 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Fenner v. City of Curham/Board of Adjustment, No. 1:10-cv-383-TDS-JLW, 2013 WL 1182240 (M.D.N.C. Mar. 21, 2013). 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.