Derek Jarvis v. Deborah Chasanow

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Derek Jarvis v. Deborah Chasanow

Opinion

Certiorari dismissed, February 21, 2012

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-1249

DEREK N. JARVIS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

DEBORAH K. CHASANOW, Chief Judge, US District Court for the District of Maryland; CHARLES B. DAY, Magistrate Judge, US District Court for the District of Maryland; PETER J. MESSITTE, Judge, US District Court for the District of Maryland; UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CLERK’S OFFICE; TRAXLER, Chief Judge, US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit; WILKINSON, Circuit Judge, US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit; NIEMEYER, Circuit Judge, US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit; AGEE, Circuit Judge, US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge. (8:11-cv-00627-AW)

Submitted: September 29, 2011 Decided: October 4, 2011

Before KING, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Derek N. Jarvis, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Derek N. Jarvis appeals the district court’s order

denying relief on his

42 U.S.C. § 1983

(2006) complaint. We

have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district

court. Jarvis v. Chasanow, No. 8:11-cv-00627-AW (D. Md. Mar.

15, 2011); see Briscoe v. LaHue,

460 U.S. 325, 335

(1983)

(noting that quasi-judicial immunity accorded to individuals who

play integral part in judicial process); Johnson v. Turner,

125 F.3d 324, 332

(6th Cir. 1997) (finding clerk’s office employees,

acting as a judge’s designee, are entitled to quasi-judicial

immunity). 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

2

Reference

Status
Unpublished