Court Opinion

ID: 9961899
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-04-20 21:00:44.358417+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:19:14.853035
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-7131      Doc: 10          Filed: 04/19/2024   Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 23-7131

        EZEKIEL J. COX,

                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

                     v.

        DR. IQBAL; LARRY EDMONDS, Warden; BOWELS, Assistant Warden; MR.
        BENJAMIN DEMPSEY, IPM; MS.      HOVER, Head Nurse R.N.; MRS.
        CLEMENTS, Nurse R.N.; MS. LAWRENCE, Nurse R.N.,

                            Defendants - Appellees.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
        Richmond. Henry E. Hudson, Senior District Judge. (3:22-cv-00708-HEH-MRC)

        Submitted: April 18, 2024                                         Decided: April 19, 2024

        Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Ezekiel J. Cox, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-7131      Doc: 10         Filed: 04/19/2024      Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Ezekiel Cox appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983

        complaint without prejudice for failure to comply with the court’s order to file a

        particularized complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. After

        Cox filed his initial complaint, the district court twice ordered Cox to file an amended

        complaint specifying the claims he sought to raise against each Defendant. The district

        court warned Cox that failure to comply would result in dismissal of the action. Cox failed

        to comply with both orders. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order dismissing

        the action with prejudice. Cox v. Iqbal, No. 3:22-cv-00708-HEH-MRC (E.D. Va. Oct. 25,

        2023). We also deny Cox’s motion to appoint counsel. 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

                                                     2