Jalal Parker v. Correctional Officer White

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: October 23, 2024
• Docket: 23-6634
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6634 Doc: 28 Filed: 10/23/2024 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-6634

JALAL PARKER,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

CORRECTIONAL OFFICER WHITE,

Defendant - Appellee,

and

CHADWICK DOTSON; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER CROMES,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. M. Hannah Lauck, District Judge. (3:21-cv-00265-MHL-MRC)

Submitted: October 1, 2024 Decided: October 23, 2024

Before THACKER, HARRIS, and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jalal Parker, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 23-6634 Doc: 28 Filed: 10/23/2024 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:

Jalal Parker appeals the district court’s order and judgment granting the motion to

dismiss under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) and dismissing Parker’s civil rights action. We

review de novo a district court’s dismissal of an action under Rule 12(b)(6), accepting

factual allegations in the complaint as true and drawing all reasonable inferences in favor

of the nonmoving party. Turner v. Thomas, 930 F.3d 640, 644 (4th Cir. 2019). But the

complaint must provide “sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to

relief that is plausible on its face.’” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting

Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)).

Upon our review of the record and Parker’s informal brief, we conclude that Parker

failed to allege sufficient facts to state a claim that prison officials failed in their

constitutional duty to protect him. See Ford v. Hooks, 108 F.4th 224, 230 (4th Cir. 2024)

(stating elements of a failure-to-protect claim). Accordingly, we affirm. We dispense with

oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

materials before the court and oral argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED