Court Opinion

ID: 9389417
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-04-25 17:01:22.410635+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:27.540748
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-6930      Doc: 10         Filed: 04/24/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 22-6930

        KARSTEN O. ALLEN,

                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

                     v.

        OFFICER B. SATER; SERGEANT E. J. DALES; OFFICER B. VIARS; UNIT
        MANAGER CHARLOTTE SHELTON; ROBERT WHITT, Chief of Housing and
        Programs; ASSISTANT WARDEN KEVIN MCCOY; OFFICER R. DANIELS;
        OFFICER J. MATNEY; OFFICER B. HURLEY; OFFICER HESS; SERGEANT
        MCCOWAN; T. LOWE, Institutional Hearings Officer; UNIT MANAGER LARRY
        FIELDS; WARDEN RODNEY YOUNCE; CARL MANIS, Regional
        Administrator,

                            Defendants - Appellees.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at
        Roanoke. Pamela Meade Sargent, Magistrate Judge. (7:21-cv-00230-PMS)

        Submitted: April 20, 2023                                         Decided: April 24, 2023

        Before KING and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Karsten Obed Allen, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-6930         Doc: 10      Filed: 04/24/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Karsten O. Allen, a Virginia inmate, appeals the magistrate judge’s order 1

        dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. 2 We have reviewed the record

        de novo and identified no error in the magistrate judge granting Defendants’ Fed. R. Civ.

        P. 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss. See Mays v. Sprinkle, 992 F.3d 295, 299 (4th Cir. 2021)

        (stating standard of review for a Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal). Accordingly, we affirm the

        magistrate judge’s dismissal order. Allen v. Sater, No. 7:21-cv-00230-PMS (W.D. Va. July

        19, 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

               1
                The parties consented to jurisdiction before a magistrate judge pursuant to 28
        U.S.C. § 636(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73.
               2
                Although the magistrate judge dismissed Allen’s complaint without prejudice, we
        conclude that the dismissal order is final and appealable. See Britt v. DeJoy, 45 F.4th 790,
        796 (4th Cir. 2022) (en banc) (published order).

                                                     2