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

Habeeb Malik v. James Sligh, Jr.

Habeeb Malik v. James Sligh, Jr.
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided January 24, 2013

Habeeb Malik v. James Sligh, Jr.

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-7576

HABEEB ABDUL MALIK, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. JAMES E. SLIGH, JR.; JANNITA GASTON; BERNARD MCKIE; JON E.

OZMINT; BILL BYARS; VAUGHN JACKSON; ROBERT E. WARD; TRAVIS REESE, All sued in their individual and official capacity, Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Orangeburg. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge. (5:11-cv-01064-RBH)

Submitted: January 22, 2013 Decided: January 24, 2013

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Habeeb Abdul Malik, Appellant Pro Se. Andrew Lindemann, DAVIDSON & LINDEMANN, PA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: Habeeb Abdul Malik appeals the district court’s order accepting in part the recommendation of the magistrate judge and 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. See Malik v. Sligh, No. 5:11-cv-01064-RBH (D.S.C. Sept. 4, 2012). 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.