Mills v. Warden

289 F. App'x 651
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided August 19, 2008·No. No. 08-6371·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Albert Curtis Mills seeks to appeal the district court’s order placing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint on the unassigned docket in accordance with Mills’ pre-filing injunction. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that the district court did not err. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Mills v. Warden, No. 8:07-cv-03466-DKC (D.Md. Jan. 8, 2008). 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.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Mills v. Warden, 289 F. App'x 651 (4th Cir. 2008).

289 F. App'x 651 (Mills v. Warden) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related