Case Name: Mike SETTLE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michael SLAGER, sued in their individual and official capacities; North Charleston Police Department, sued in their individual and official capacities, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-01-15
Citations: 628 F. App'x 206
Docket Number: No. 15-7052
Parties: Mike SETTLE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michael SLAGER, sued in their individual and official capacities; North Charleston Police Department, sued in their individual and official capacities, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before MOTZ, FLOYD, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 628
Pages: 206–206

Head Matter:
Mike SETTLE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michael SLAGER, sued in their individual and official capacities; North Charleston Police Department, sued in their individual and official capacities, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 15-7052.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Nov. 23, 2015.
Decided: Jan. 15, 2016.
Mike Settle, Appellant Pro Se.
Before MOTZ, FLOYD, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Mike Settle appeals the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. First, Settle's consent was not required before the district court referred to the magistrate judge for a non-dispositive ruling, and the district court appropriately conducted a de novo review of those portions of the report to which Settle objected. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) (2012). Moreover, as the district court held, Settle has no standing to assert the constitutional rights of a third party, see Archuleta v. McShan, 897 F.2d 495, 497 (10th Cir.1990), and his state claim is likewise meritless. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Settle v. Slager, No. 2:15-cv-01802-RMG (D.S.C. June 22, 2015). 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.