Barnes v. Dedmondt

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-8243

STEVEN LEWIS BARNES,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

GEORGE DEDMONDT; BRAIN WILLIAMS; SHADELL STEVENS; MARCUS SMITH; POLLY HALL; A. DELL DOBEY; HEIDI PRESSLEY; RANDY DORAN; LT. KARREN JAGGERS, official and individual capacity,

Defendants – Appellees,

and

BRENDA B. CARPENTER,

Defendant.

No. 10-6113

GEORGE DEDMONDT; BRAIN WILLIAMS; SHADELL STEVENS; MARCUS SMITH; POLLY HALL; A. DELL DOBEY; HEIDI PRESSLEY; RANDY DORAN; LT. KARREN JAGGERS, official and individual capacity,

and BRENDA B. CARPENTER; O-LEE STURKEY,

Defendants.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge. (4:08-cv-00002-MBS)

Submitted: September 8, 2010 Decided: September 22, 2010

Before KING, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Steven Lewis Barnes, Appellant Pro Se. William Henry Davidson, II, Daniel C. Plyler, DAVIDSON, MORRISON & LINDEMANN, PA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2 PER CURIAM:

Steven Lewis Barnes appeals the district court’s

orders adopting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and

dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint and denying

reconsideration. Barnes also challenges several pretrial orders

denying appointment of counsel, denying extensions of time for

discovery and to object to the report and recommendation, and

denying recusal of the magistrate judge. We have reviewed the

record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for

the reasons stated by the district court. Barnes v. Dedmondt,

No. 4:08-cv-00002-MBS (D.S.C. Sept. 29 & Dec. 10, 2009). 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