Case Name: Teddy PYATT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. William BYARS, South Carolina Dept of Corr Commissioner; Robert E. Ward, Deputy Dir Div of Operations, in their Ofc and Ind Capacity, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-08-29
Citations: 475 F. App'x 942
Docket Number: No. 12-6914
Parties: Teddy PYATT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. William BYARS, South Carolina Dept of Corr Commissioner; Robert E. Ward, Deputy Dir Div of Operations, in their Ofc and Ind Capacity, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before DAVIS, KEENAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 475
Pages: 942–942

Head Matter:
Teddy PYATT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. William BYARS, South Carolina Dept of Corr Commissioner; Robert E. Ward, Deputy Dir Div of Operations, in their Ofc and Ind Capacity, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 12-6914.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Aug. 23, 2012.
Decided Aug. 29, 2012.
Teddy Pyatt, Appellant Pro Se. Andrew Lindemann, Davidson & Lindemann, PA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appel-lees.
Before DAVIS, KEENAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Teddy Pyatt appeals the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying his motion for a preliminary injunction under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Pyatt v. Byars, No. 9:12-cv-00266-DCN-BM, 2012 WL 1535011 (D.S.C. May 1, 2012). 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.