Case Name: Mr. John Malcolm DICKSON, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America; United States Department of Justice, Attorney General of the United States of America; United States Attorney General, For the Eastern District of Virginia, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-04-02
Citations: 599 F. App'x 74
Docket Number: No. 14-1792
Parties: Mr. John Malcolm DICKSON, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America; United States Department of Justice, Attorney General of the United States of America; United States Attorney General, For the Eastern District of Virginia, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before THACKER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and WILLIAM L. OSTEEN, JR., Chief United States District Judge for the Middle District of North Carolina, sitting by designation.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 599
Pages: 74–74

Head Matter:
Mr. John Malcolm DICKSON, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America; United States Department of Justice, Attorney General of the United States of America; United States Attorney General, For the Eastern District of Virginia, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 14-1792.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Feb. 19, 2015.
Decided: April 2, 2015.
John M. Dickson, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. George Maralan Kelley, III, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellees.
Before THACKER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and WILLIAM L. OSTEEN, JR., Chief United States District Judge for the Middle District of North Carolina, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
John Malcolm Dickson, Jr., appeals the district court's order dismissing his civil complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Dickson v. United States, No. 2:13-cv-00253-AWA-DEM (E.D. Va. June 10, 2014). 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.