UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-7774

NICHOLAS WARNER JONES, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus

RONALD MURPHY; ROBERT C. MILLER, ROBERT A.

CLAYTON, M.D.; E. G. ELIAS, Defendants - Appellees, and

ROY WHITEHOUSE, Regional Administrator; ROBERT GRANGER; RONALD JONES, Physician Assistant; JANE DOE, Registered Nurse; JOHN DOE, Physician Assistant; JAMES WRIGHT, Health Services Administrator; SCOTT D. CORLEW, M.D.; BRYON K. BARTLE, M.D.; ALLEASE SLOAN; NAVZAT TURKMAN, Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frank A. Kaufman, Senior District Judge. (CA-91-1166-K)

Submitted: May 29, 1998 Decided: June 30, 1998

Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Nicholas Warner Jones, Appellant Pro Se. Carol A. Zuckerman, WHITEFORD, TAYLOR & PRESTON, Baltimore, Maryland; Philip Melton Andrews, KRAMON & GRAHAM, P.A., Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Nicholas Jones appeals from the district court’s order grant- ing summary judgment to Defendants Ronald Jones, Robert A. Clayton, Allease Sloan, Nevzat Turkman, Scott D. Corlew, Bryon K. Bartle, and E.G. Elias in an action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994), and granting summary judgment on all allegations except as to the claim of inadequate medical treatment for suture wire remaining in Jones’s abdomen following hernia surgery. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm primarily on the reasoning of the district court. Jones v. Murphy, No. CA-91-1166-K (D. Md. July 22, 1992). We further grant Defendant Clayton’s and Elias’s motion and memorandum to strike Jones’s Reply to the Informal Brief filed by Defendants. We also deny as moot the motion of Roy White- house and Robert Granger to dismiss the case as to them. We dis- pense 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