Case Name: Michael J. SINDRAM, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Howard E. WALLIN; Richard P. Gilbert; Robert F. Sweeney; Thomas Lohm; Jeffrey L. Ward; James L. Ryan; Cornelius J. Vaughey, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-04-19
Citations: 126 F. App'x 122
Docket Number: No. 04-1787
Parties: Michael J. SINDRAM, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Howard E. WALLIN; Richard P. Gilbert; Robert F. Sweeney; Thomas Lohm; Jeffrey L. Ward; James L. Ryan; Cornelius J. Vaughey, Defendants—Appellees.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 126
Pages: 122–123

Head Matter:
Michael J. SINDRAM, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Howard E. WALLIN; Richard P. Gilbert; Robert F. Sweeney; Thomas Lohm; Jeffrey L. Ward; James L. Ryan; Cornelius J. Vaughey, Defendants—Appellees.
No. 04-1787.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted April 14, 2005.
Decided April 19, 2005.
Michael J. Sindram, Appellant pro se.
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Michael J. Sindram appeals a district court order denying his motion to reconsider and vacate a 1990 order establishing a pre-filing review procedure. The district court denied the motion finding Sindram failed to articulate a reason as to why the 1990 order should be vacated. We have reviewed the record and the district court order and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Sindram v. Wallin, No. CA-90-800-1-FNS (D. Md. filed May 24, 2004; entered May 25, 2004). 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