Court Opinion

ID: 1000946
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 17:48:31.087721+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:35:17.465274
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                            No. 99-7589

WILLIAM H. MATHEWS,

                                              Plaintiff - Appellant,

          versus

DR. PINO; DR. WRIGHT; DR. VELANDIA, et al.,

                                           Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge.
(CA-99-897-AW)

Submitted:   February 24, 2000             Decided:   March 3, 2000

Before MOTZ and KING, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit
Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

William H. Mathews, Appellant Pro Se.      Philip Melton Andrews,
Michael Evan Blumenfeld, KRAMON & GRAHAM, Baltimore, Maryland, for
Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:

     William H. Mathews appeals the district court’s order denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1999) complaint.    We

have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find

no reversible error.    Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of

the district court.    See Mathews v. Pino, No. CA-99-897-AW (D. Md.

Oct. 27, 1999).*   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

     *
       Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on
October 26, 1999, the district court’s records show that it was
entered on the docket sheet on October 27, 1999. Pursuant to Rules
58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the
date the order was entered on the docket sheet that we take as the
effective date of the district court’s decision. See Wilson v.
Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986).

                                  2