Case Name: Randy DRUMMOND, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Dr. BEARDEN; Medical Corp. Inc., Defendants-Appellees, and Jon E. Ozmint, Director of South Carolina Dept. of Correction; Jenny Ardis, Administrative Coordinator of Division of Health Services; Department of Corrections, Defendants
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-08-21
Citations: 475 F. App'x 924
Docket Number: No. 12-6778
Parties: Randy DRUMMOND, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Dr. BEARDEN; Medical Corp. Inc., Defendants—Appellees, and Jon E. Ozmint, Director of South Carolina Dept. of Correction; Jenny Ardis, Administrative Coordinator of Division of Health Services; Department of Corrections, Defendants.
Judges: Before KING and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 475
Pages: 924–925

Head Matter:
Randy DRUMMOND, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Dr. BEARDEN; Medical Corp. Inc., Defendants—Appellees, and Jon E. Ozmint, Director of South Carolina Dept. of Correction; Jenny Ardis, Administrative Coordinator of Division of Health Services; Department of Corrections, Defendants.
No. 12-6778.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 31, 2012.
Decided: Aug. 21, 2012.
Randy Drummond, Appellant Pro Se. Steven Michael Pruitt, McDonald, Patrick, Tinsley, Baggett & Poston, Greenwood, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Before KING and SHEDD, 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Randy Drummond appeals the district court's order denying his motion to amend his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint after entry of judgment. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's order. See Drummond v. Ozmint, No. 8:10-cv02423-TLW (D.S.C. Apr. 17, 2012; Feb. 17, 2012); 2011 WL 6026305 (Dec. 5, 2011). 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.