John Gayden appeals the district court’s orders dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint and denying his motion to reconsider pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm substantially on the reasoning of the district court. * See Gayden v. Baltimore City Police Dep't, No. CA-03-337-1-WDQ (D.Md. July 1, 2003; August 1, 2003). 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