Smith v. Wang

Fourth Circuit

Smith v. Wang

431 F. App'x 228

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Smith v. Wang. Read the opinion of the Court — 370 F. App'x 377 →

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided May 24, 2011·No. No. 11-6052·Published

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Johnathan Lee Smith appeals the district court’s orders dismissing without prejudice his civil rights complaint and his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Smith v. Wang, No. 7:09-cv-00370-sgw-mfu (W.D.Va. Sept. 7, 2010; Dec. 7, 2010). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before [229]*229the 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:

Johnathan Lee Smith appeals the district court’s orders dismissing without prejudice his civil rights complaint and his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Smith v. Wang, No. 7:09-cv-00370-sgw-mfu (W.D.Va. Sept. 7, 2010; Dec. 7, 2010). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before [229]*229the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

Smith v. Wang, 431 F. App'x 228 (4th Cir. 2011).

Pincite

431 F. App'x 228 (Smith v. Wang) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.