Court Opinion

ID: 9382284
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-03-25 21:00:37.580755+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:38.212109
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-6981      Doc: 19        Filed: 03/24/2023   Pg: 1 of 3

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                              UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                  FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 22-6981

        DARRELL L. GOSS,

                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

                     v.

        RYSHEMA DAVIS, Nutritionist; MR. GORE, Food Service Director; BETTY SMITH,
        Food Service Branch Chief,

                            Defendants - Appellees.

                     and

        ANN SHEPPARD, Associate Warden; SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
        CORRECTIONS,

                            Defendants.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
        Charleston. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior District Judge. (2:21-cv-00558-HMH)

        Submitted: March 21, 2023                                    Decided: March 24, 2023

        Before WYNN and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-6981      Doc: 19         Filed: 03/24/2023    Pg: 2 of 3

        Darrell L. Goss, Appellant Pro Se. Christopher Thomas Dorsel, BRINGARDNER
        INJURY LAW FIRM, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

                                                    2
USCA4 Appeal: 22-6981      Doc: 19         Filed: 03/24/2023     Pg: 3 of 3

        PER CURIAM:

               Darrell L. Goss appeals the district court’s orders adopting the recommendation of

        the magistrate judge, granting summary judgment to Defendants in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983

        civil rights action, and denying his request for injunctive relief, and denying his motions

        for reconsideration and to alter or amend judgment. We have reviewed the record and find

        no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.

        Goss v. Davis, No. 2:21-cv-00558-HMH (D.S.C. July 28, Aug. 2 & Aug. 12, 2022).

        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

                                                    3