Case Name: Mark R. CORRIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Ms. ATKINS; Ms. Bollot; Doctor Cervi; Pitt County; Wilson County; Sargeant Clifford Bailey; Officer Jessie Barnes; Howard Adams; Diana Carmack; Katharina Dewald, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-11-22
Citations: 546 F. App'x 297
Docket Number: No. 13-7183
Parties: Mark R. CORRIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Ms. ATKINS; Ms. Bollot; Doctor Cervi; Pitt County; Wilson County; Sargeant Clifford Bailey; Officer Jessie Barnes; Howard Adams; Diana Carmack; Katharina Dewald, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before WYNN and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 546
Pages: 297–297

Head Matter:
Mark R. CORRIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Ms. ATKINS; Ms. Bollot; Doctor Cervi; Pitt County; Wilson County; Sargeant Clifford Bailey; Officer Jessie Barnes; Howard Adams; Diana Carmack; Katharina Dewald, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 13-7183.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Nov. 19, 2013.
Decided: Nov. 22, 2013.
Mark R. Corrigan, Appellant Pro Se. Tommy Willis Jarrett, Dees, Smith, Powell, Jarrett, Dees & Jones, Goldsboro, North Carolina; Francisco Joseph Benzo-ni, John D. Madden, Smith, Anderson, Blount, Dorsett, Mitchell & Jernigan, LLP, Raleigh, North Carolina; Julie Baxter Bradburn, Kristen Yarbrough Riggs, Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice, Raleigh, North Carolina; Dieter Mauch, Hed-rick, Murray, Bryson, Kennett, Mauch & Connor, PLLC, Durham, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Before WYNN and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Mark R. Corrigan appeals the district court's order denying his Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(3) motion for reconsideration of the court's 2002 order granting Appellees' motion for summary judgment and dismissing Corrigan's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Corrigan v. Atkins, No. 5:98-ct-00667-BR (E.D.N.C. July 9, 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.