OPINION

Larry L. Pressley seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and to the extent that Pressley’s objections to the magistrate judge’s report were sufficient to preserve appellate review, there was no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Pressley v. Doe, No. CA-02-4020 (D.S.C. July 16, 2003); see also Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985); Orpiano v. Johnson, 687 F.2d 44, 47 (4th Cir. 1982). Because, however, Pressley’s action was dismissed upon a grant of summary judgment to the Defendants, we vacate the district court’s order to the extent it assessed a strike pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) (2000). 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 IN PART; VACATED IN PART.