Cleaven Williams, Jr. v. Warden Merritt

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: March 19, 2012
• Docket: 11-7465
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-7465

CLEAVEN L. WILLIAMS, JR.,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

WARDEN MERRITT; BARTEE, Assistant Warden; OFFICER YOUNG; SERGEANT CALVIN WILLIAMS; OFFICER LARYEA; OFFICER SAUNDERS; MARIA JOHNSON; NURSE JANE DOE; FLORENCE FOSTER, Inmate Grievance Coordinator; MR. COLEY; KRUMP, Chief of Security; DR. JOHN DOE, University of Md Shock Trauma; C.O. CRAIG WILLIAMS,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (1:10-cv-00935-CCB)

Submitted: March 15, 2012 Decided: March 19, 2012

Before DUNCAN and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Cleaven L. Williams, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Donald Eugene Hoffman, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Pikesville, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Cleaven L. Williams, Jr., appeals the district court’s

orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint.

We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm substantially for the reasons stated by

the district court. Williams v. Merritt, No. 1:10-cv-00935-CCB

(D. Md. Mar. 28, 2011; Jul. 14, 2011). ∗ 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

∗ We affirm the district court’s dismissal of Claim V on the ground that Williams failed to offer any evidence, apart from his own bald and conclusory allegations, to support his claims. See Erwin v. United States, 591 F.3d 313, 319-20 (4th Cir. 2010) (noting that mere conclusory allegations are insufficient to support the nonmoving party’s case).