UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-1084

ERIC MARIO BYERS, Plaintiff - Appellant, and

UNITED STATES ex rel. $12,642.00 United States Currency, 1993 Mazda RX7 (VIN: JM1FD3312P0207844), 1993 Mazda 929 (VIN: JM1HD4611P0202550), 2001 Suzuki Motorcycle (VIN: JS1GN7BA912102511), Plaintiff,

versus

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA; J. J. KOZLOWSKI, Det. of the Commonwealth of Virginia; M. D.

SANDERSON, Det. of the Commonwealth of Virginia; T. P. DUGAN, Det. of the Commonwealth of Virginia; D. GUEVARA, Det. of the Commonwealth of Virginia; J. J. MASSIE, Det. of the Commonwealth of Virginia; CORCORAN, Det. of the Commonwealth of Virginia; JURACK, Det. of the Commonwealth of Virginia; CALHOUN, Det. of the Commonwealth of Virginia; STEWART, Det. of the Commonwealth of Virginia; T. CARINI, Det. of the Commonwealth of Virginia; N. C. THOMPSON, Lieutenant, Det. of the Commonwealth of Virginia; HARVEY BRYANT, III, Commonwealth Attorney of the Commonwealth of Virginia, Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry Coke Morgan, Jr., District Judge. (CA-03-724-2)

Submitted: May 21, 2004 Decided: June 15, 2004

Before MICHAEL and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed in part, affirmed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Eric Mario Byers, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

- 2 - PER CURIAM: Eric Mario Byers appeals the district court’s judgment and order denying his requests for a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction and summarily dismissing his civil rights complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we dismiss that part of the appeal from the denial of a temporary restraining order. See Virginia v. Tenneco, Inc., 538 F.2d 1026, 1029-30 (4th Cir. 1976). We affirm the remainder of the district court’s order for the reasons stated by the district court. See Byers v. Commonwealth, No. CA-03-724-2 (E.D. Va. Dec. 10, 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.

DISMISSED IN PART, AFFIRMED IN PART

- 3 -