Court Opinion

ID: 9943715
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-24 21:00:39.818979+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:47:54.014011
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6300      Doc: 16         Filed: 02/23/2024    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 23-6300

        WARREN MATTHEW GIDDINGS,

                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

                     v.

        CORIZON; MR. RORHER; MCTC NURSE; CENTURION BEHAVIORAL
        HEALTH STAFF,

                            Defendants - Appellees.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.
        Lydia Kay Griggsby, District Judge. (1:21-cv-03166-LKG)

        Submitted: January 31, 2024                                  Decided: February 23, 2024

        Before DIAZ, Chief Judge, and RICHARDSON and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges.

        Affirmed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Warren Matthew Giddings, Appellant Pro Se. Megan Trocki Mantzavinos, MARKS,
        O’NEILL, O’BRIEN, DOHERTY & KELLY, P.C., Towson, Maryland, for Appellee
        Corizon.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-6300         Doc: 16      Filed: 02/23/2024     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Warren Matthew Giddings appeals the district court’s order granting summary

        judgment to Corizon on his claims raised pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and dismissing the

        remaining Defendants. On appeal, Corizon has filed a suggestion of bankruptcy and notice

        of automatic stay informing this court that it commenced Chapter 11 bankruptcy

        proceedings in February 2023. The automatic stay precludes us from reviewing the district

        court’s disposition of Giddings’ claims against Corizon. As to the court’s disposition of

        Giddings’ claims against the remaining Defendants, we have reviewed the record and find

        no reversible error. Accordingly, we grant Giddings’ motion to proceed under the Prison

        Litigation Reform Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b), and affirm the district court’s order as to all

        defendants except Corizon. Giddings v. Corizon, No. 1:21-cv-03166-LKG (D. Md. Jan.

        25, 2023). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are

        adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the

        decisional process.

                                                                              AFFIRMED IN PART

                                                    2