Court Opinion

ID: 9881778
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-03 21:00:51.513781+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:48:18.051177
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-7262      Doc: 12         Filed: 10/02/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 22-7262

        JONATHAN A. HARRIS, SR.,

                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

                     v.

        J. SADLER, Human Service Administrator; MICHAEL D. BROOKS, Ordering
        Physician/Attending Physician; S. HILL, L.P.N.; ARMOR MEDICAL SERVICES;
        BETH CABELL, Warden of Sussex II State Prison; HAROLD W. CLARKE,
        Director; A. DAVID ROBINSON, Chief of Operations; FREDERICK SCHILLING,
        Director of Health Services; VINCE DALTON, M.D.; SMITH, Physical Therapist;
        ANITA CRITTON, Grievance Coordinator; P. LAMPMEN, H.S.A.,

                            Defendants - Appellees.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
        Norfolk. Arenda L. Wright Allen, District Judge. (2:20-cv-00451-AWA-RJK)

        Submitted: September 28, 2023                                     Decided: October 2, 2023

        Before NIEMEYER, THACKER, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Jonathan A. Harris, Sr., Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-7262      Doc: 12         Filed: 10/02/2023      Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Jonathan A. Harris, Sr., appeals the district court’s dismissal of his complaint

        without prejudice pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) for failure to prosecute and comply with

        a court order. ∗ We have reviewed the record and discern no reversible error. Accordingly,

        we affirm the district court’s order. Harris v. Sadler, No. 2:20-cv-00451-AWA-RJK

        (E.D. Va. Oct. 3, 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

               ∗
                Because the district court did not afford Harris leave to amend, the dismissal order,
        although without prejudice, is a final, appealable order. See Britt v. DeJoy, 45 F.4th 790,
        796 (4th Cir. 2022) (en banc) (order).
                                                     2