Case Name: Kamal S. MUWWAKKIL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Gene M. JOHNSON; Larry Huffman; John S. Garman; Linda B. Shear; Bryan S. Watson; A.P. Harvey; J. Combs; P. Scarberry; J. McQueen, Sergeant; M. McBride; T. Thompson; Brenda Ravizee; G. Robinson; M. Hensley, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-01-13
Citations: 407 F. App'x 685
Docket Number: No. 10-7373
Parties: Kamal S. MUWWAKKIL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Gene M. JOHNSON; Larry Huffman; John S. Garman; Linda B. Shear; Bryan S. Watson; A.P. Harvey; J. Combs; P. Scarberry; J. McQueen, Sergeant; M. McBride; T. Thompson; Brenda Ravizee; G. Robinson; M. Hensley, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before DUNCAN, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 407
Pages: 685–685

Head Matter:
Kamal S. MUWWAKKIL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Gene M. JOHNSON; Larry Huffman; John S. Garman; Linda B. Shear; Bryan S. Watson; A.P. Harvey; J. Combs; P. Scarberry; J. McQueen, Sergeant; M. McBride; T. Thompson; Brenda Ravizee; G. Robinson; M. Hensley, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 10-7373.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Dec. 16, 2010.
Decided: Jan. 13, 2011.
Kamal S. Muwwakkil, Appellant Pro Se. Banci Enga Tewolde, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia; Jim H. Guynn, Jr., Guynn, Memmer & Dillon, PC, Salem, Virginia, for Appellees.
Before DUNCAN, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Kamal S. Muwwakkil appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Muwwakkil v. Johnson, No. 7:09-cv-00318-gee-mfu, 2010 WL 3585983 (W.D.Va. Sept. 12, 2010). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED.