U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2013

Raheem Rahman v. J. Stouffer

Raheem Rahman v. J. Stouffer
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided August 21, 2013

Raheem Rahman v. J. Stouffer

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-6627

RAHEEM RAHMAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. J. MICHAEL STOUFFER, Commissioner; BOBBY SHEARIN, Warden; LIEUTENANT DOLLY; SERGEANT WHITACRE; OFFICER HOOVER; GARY MAYNARD, Secretary; DR. GREGORY TAYLOR, Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, Senior District Judge. (1:11-cv-03497-WMN)

Submitted: August 7, 2013 Decided: August 21, 2013

Before AGEE and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Raheem Rahman, Appellant Pro Se. Nancy P. Tennis, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland; Michelle Jacquelyn Marzullo, MARKS, O’NEILL, O’BRIEN, DOHERTY & KELLY, P.C., Towson, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: Raheem Rahman appeals the district court’s orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint and denying his motion under Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Rahman v. Stouffer, No. 1:11-cv-03497-WMN (D. Md. Mar. 12, 2013; Apr.

22, 2013). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.