Seibert v. Mohead

Fourth Circuit

Seibert v. Mohead

502 F. App'x 268

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided December 27, 2012·No. No. 12-7726·Published

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Douglas B. Seibert appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Seibert’s motion to appoint counsel, and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Seibert v. Mohead, No. 2:12-cv-00399-RAJ-TEM (E.D.Va. Sept. 4, 2012). 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

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Douglas B. Seibert appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Seibert’s motion to appoint counsel, and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Seibert v. Mohead, No. 2:12-cv-00399-RAJ-TEM (E.D.Va. Sept. 4, 2012). 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.

Seibert v. Mohead, 502 F. App'x 268 (4th Cir. 2012).

Pincite

502 F. App'x 268 (Seibert v. Mohead) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related