Case Name: Omoro RAGLAND, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. H.R. POWELL; W.W. Pixley; W.F. Seal; W. Thorne; R.M. Hedgepeth; Lieutenant Barnes; Lieutenant Smith; Correctional Officer Boone; Correctional Officer Pryor; Ms. Tann; Ronald J. Angelone; Gene Johnson; R. Fleming; J. Lee; D. Hammond; R.A. Young; L.W. Jarvis; F. Lockhart; K.A. Polinsky; V.J. Bandy; Gerald K. Washington; B. Booker; Lieutenant Edmonds; Ms. Harrison; L.W. Huffman; J. Boone, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-08-02
Citations: 193 F. App'x 218
Docket Number: No. 06-6575
Parties: Omoro RAGLAND, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. H.R. POWELL; W.W. Pixley; W.F. Seal; W. Thorne; R.M. Hedgepeth; Lieutenant Barnes; Lieutenant Smith; Correctional Officer Boone; Correctional Officer Pryor; Ms. Tann; Ronald J. Angelone; Gene Johnson; R. Fleming; J. Lee; D. Hammond; R.A. Young; L.W. Jarvis; F. Lockhart; K.A. Polinsky; V.J. Bandy; Gerald K. Washington; B. Booker; Lieutenant Edmonds; Ms. Harrison; L.W. Huffman; J. Boone, Defendants—Appellees.
Judges: Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 193
Pages: 218–219

Head Matter:
Omoro RAGLAND, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. H.R. POWELL; W.W. Pixley; W.F. Seal; W. Thorne; R.M. Hedgepeth; Lieutenant Barnes; Lieutenant Smith; Correctional Officer Boone; Correctional Officer Pryor; Ms. Tann; Ronald J. Angelone; Gene Johnson; R. Fleming; J. Lee; D. Hammond; R.A. Young; L.W. Jarvis; F. Lockhart; K.A. Polinsky; V.J. Bandy; Gerald K. Washington; B. Booker; Lieutenant Edmonds; Ms. Harrison; L.W. Huffman; J. Boone, Defendants—Appellees.
No. 06-6575.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 25, 2006.
Decided: Aug. 2, 2006.
Omoro Ragland, Appellant Pro Se. Pamela Anne Sargent, Assistant Attorney General, Joel Christopher Hoppe, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Omoro Ragland appeals from the district court's order granting summary judgment to the Defendants in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) action challenging, among other things, the validity and enforcement of the prison's grooming policy. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Ragland v. Angelone, 420 F.Supp.2d 507 (W.D.Va.2006). 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.