Maurice Roberts v. David Freeman

627 F. App'x 583

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
• Decided: January 11, 2016
• Docket: 14-3252
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Missouri inmate Maurice Roberts appeals after the district court 1 entered final judgment in his pro se 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. We conclude that, for the reasons given by the district court: (1) dismissal was proper as to the four defendants named in Roberts’s original complaint, see Rochling v. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, 725 F.3d 927, 930 (8th Cir.2013) (standard of review for Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) dismissal); Moore v. Sims, 200 F.3d 1170, 1171 (8th Cir.2000) (per curiam) (standard of review for 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) dismissal); and (2) summary judgment as to added defendant David Freeman was proper, see Jenkins v. Cty. of Hennepin, Minn., 557 F.3d 628, 631 (8th Cir.2009) (de novo review of summary judgment grant). We further conclude there is no basis for reversal in the court’s rulings on Roberts’s numerous motions throughout the proceedings regarding discovery, see Metro. Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Calvin, 802 F.3d 933, 941 (8th Cir.2015); the appointment of counsel, see Phillips v. Jasper Cnty. Jail, 437 F.3d 791, 794 (8th Cir.2006); injunctive relief, see Devose v. Herrington, 42 F.3d 470, 471 (8th Cir.1994) (per curiam); or consolidation with other cases, see U.S. E.P.A. v. City of Green Forest, Ark., 921 F.2d 1394, 1402 (8th Cir.1990).

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

1 . The Honorable Nanette K. Laughrey, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.