John Hudson v. Fredrick Shaw

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: December 18, 2025
• Docket: 23-6391
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6391 Doc: 8 Filed: 12/18/2025 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-6391

JOHN SCOTT HUDSON,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

FREDRICK SHAW,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:22-ct-03313-BO-RJ)

Submitted: December 1, 2025 Decided: December 18, 2025

Before GREGORY and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed as modified by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John Scott Hudson, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 23-6391 Doc: 8 Filed: 12/18/2025 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:

John Scott Hudson appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983

complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). We have reviewed the record and find no

reversible error in the district court’s conclusion that Hudson failed to state plausible

deliberate indifference and retaliation claims. See Hodges v. Meletis, 109 F.4th 252, 259

(4th Cir. 2024) (describing standard for dismissal under § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii)). Accordingly,

we modify the district court’s order, Hudson v. Shaw, No. 5:22-ct-03313-BO-RJ (E.D.N.C.

Mar. 28, 2023), to reflect dismissal of Hudson’s complaint without prejudice, see King v.

Rubenstein, 825 F.3d 206, 225 (4th Cir. 2016), and affirm the order as modified, see

28 U.S.C. § 2106. 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 AS MODIFIED