Case Name: Steven P. LAWSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SPARTANBURG COUNTY DETENTION FACILITY; Spartanburg General Hospital; Doctor Bianca; John Doe, Statutory Agent Officer; Jane Doe, Statutory Agent Officer, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-05-05
Citations: 128 F. App'x 325
Docket Number: No. 04-7934
Parties: Steven P. LAWSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SPARTANBURG COUNTY DETENTION FACILITY; Spartanburg General Hospital; Doctor Bianca; John Doe, Statutory Agent Officer; Jane Doe, Statutory Agent Officer, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 128
Pages: 325–325

Head Matter:
Steven P. LAWSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SPARTANBURG COUNTY DETENTION FACILITY; Spartanburg General Hospital; Doctor Bianca; John Doe, Statutory Agent Officer; Jane Doe, Statutory Agent Officer, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 04-7934.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted April 28, 2005.
Decided May 5, 2005.
Steven P. Lawson, Appellant pro se. Steve Michael Pruitt, McDonald, Patrick, Tinsley, Baggett & Poston, Greenwood, South Carolina; Perry D. Boulier, Stacey Campbell Davis, Holcombe, Bomar, Gunn & Bradford, P.A., Spartanburg, South Carolina; Stanley Turner Case, Butler, Means, Evins & Browne, Spartanburg, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Before WILLIAMS, KING, and DUNCAN, 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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.
Steven P. Lawson appeals the district court's order denying his Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b) motion to reconsider its earlier order adopting the magistrate judge's recommendation to dismiss his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) action. We have reviewed the record and find no abuse of discretion. Heyman v. M.L. Mktg. Co., 116 F.3d 91, 94 (4th Cir.1997). Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Lawson v. Spartanburg County Detention Facility, No. CA-02-3930-3-24BC (D.S.C. Nov. 12, 2004). Lawson's motion to stay or remand this appeal is denied. 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