Case Name: Somchai NOONSAB, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA; W. T. Brown; Stephen Russell; Melanie Shekita; Paul Gessner; Michael Howell; Kindra Aileen; Detective Chan; Paul C. Ridgeway; Daniel Horn, Jr.; Christina Cameron Roedeo; Josh Stein, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-02-28
Citations: 678 F. App'x 130
Docket Number: No. 16-7430
Parties: Somchai NOONSAB, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA; W. T. Brown; Stephen Russell; Melanie Shekita; Paul Gessner; Michael Howell; Kindra Aileen; Detective Chan; Paul C. Ridgeway; Daniel Horn, Jr.; Christina Cameron Roedeo; Josh Stein, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before SHEDD and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 678
Pages: 130–130

Head Matter:
Somchai NOONSAB, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA; W. T. Brown; Stephen Russell; Melanie Shekita; Paul Gessner; Michael Howell; Kindra Aileen; Detective Chan; Paul C. Ridgeway; Daniel Horn, Jr.; Christina Cameron Roedeo; Josh Stein, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 16-7430
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: February 23, 2017
Decided: February 28, 2017
Somchai Noonsab, Appellant Pro Se.
Before SHEDD and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Somchai Noonsab appeals the district court's orders dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Noonsab v. U.S. Dist. Court for the E. Dist. of N.C., No. 5:16-ct-03112-FL (E.D.N.C. Aug. 30, 2016 & Oct. 13, 2016). 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