Diaz v. Lee

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: August 11, 2004
• Docket: 03-7446
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-7446

FELIBERTO DIAZ,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

RANDY LEE; PAT BAILEY; DOCTOR MURPHY; THE UTILIZATION REVIEW BOARD; BOYD BENNETT,

Defendants - Appellees.

No. 04-6246

PAT BAILEY,

Defendant - Appellee,

and

RANDY LEE; DOCTOR MURPHY; THE UTILIZATION REVIEW BOARD; BOYD BENNETT,

Defendants. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (CA-01-732-5-BR)

Submitted: June 16, 2004 Decided: August 11, 2004

Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Feliberto Diaz, Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth F. Parsons, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, Renee Billings Crawford, CRAWFORD LAW OFFICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

- 2 - PER CURIAM:

In these consolidated appeals, Feliberto Diaz appeals the

district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983

(2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no

reversible error.* Accordingly, we affirm substantially on the

reasoning of the district court. See Diaz v. Lee, CA-01-732-5-BR

(E.D.N.C. Aug. 21, 2003; Jan. 7, 2004). 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 note that because the Utilization Review Board (“URB”) is not a “person” under § 1983, it was not necessary for the district court to address the merits of Diaz’s claims against it. See Will v. Mich. Dep’t of State Police, 491 U.S. 58, 70 (1989).

- 3 -