UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-6869

ALBERT CURTIS MILLS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus

JACK KAVANAGH, Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CA- 97-4043-DKC)

Submitted: November 4, 1999 Decided: November 9, 1999

Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Albert Curtis Mills, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Stephanie Judith Lane-Weber, Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Albert Curtis Mills appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for reconsideration of the dismissal of his 42 U.S.C.A.

§ 1983 (West Supp. 1998) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Mills v. Kavanagh, No. CA-97-4043-DKC (D. Md. June 9, 1999).* 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

* Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on June 8, 1999, the district court’s records show that it was entered on the docket sheet on June 9, 1999. Pursuant to Rules 58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date that the order was entered on the docket sheet that we take as the effective date of the district court’s decision. See Wilson v. Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986).