Case Name: Mr. Douglas M. ROSEBY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Mr. Paul E. BUDLOW, et al., Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-05-03
Citations: 427 F. App'x 248
Docket Number: No. 10-6937
Parties: Mr. Douglas M. ROSEBY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Mr. Paul E. BUDLOW, et al., Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 427
Pages: 248–249

Head Matter:
Mr. Douglas M. ROSEBY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Mr. Paul E. BUDLOW, et al., Defendant-Appellee.
No. 10-6937.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: April 14, 2011.
Decided: May 3, 2011.
Douglas M. Roseby, Appellant Pro Se.
Before WILKINSON and DAVIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Douglas M. Roseby appeals the district court's order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint, without prejudice, as not cognizable under Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 114 S.Ct. 2364, 129 L.Ed.2d 383 (1994). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's order. See Roseby v. Budlow, No. 8:10-ev-00417-AW, 2010 WL 917203 (D.Md. Mar. 9, 2010). 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.