UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-7450

ROBERT HOLLAND KOON, a/k/a Robert Koon, a/k/a Robert H. Koon,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

LORETTA LYNCH, US Attorney General, in her official capacity as chief/judge/chief solicitor of SC; JEAN TOAL, Chief Justice, in their official capacity as chief/judge/chief solicitor of SC; ALAN WILSON, SC Attorney General, in his official capacity as chief/judge/chief solicitor of SC,

Defendants - Appellees.

No. 15-7454

ROBERT HOLLAND KOON, a/k/a Robert Koon, a/k/a Robert H. Koon,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

LORETTA LYNCH, US Attorney General, in her official capacity as chief/judge/chief solicitor of SC; JEAN TOAL, Chief Justice, in their official capacity as chief/judge/chief solicitor of SC; ALAN WILSON, SC Attorney General, in his official capacity as chief/judge/chief solicitor of SC,

Defendants - Appellees. Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. David C. Norton, District Judge. (4:15-cv-02107-DCN; 4:15-cv-02349-DCN)

Submitted: December 17, 2015 Decided: December 22, 2015

Before DIAZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Robert Holland Koon, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2 PER CURIAM:

In these duplicative and consolidated cases, Robert Holland

Koon appeals the district court’s orders accepting the

recommendations of the magistrate judge and dismissing without

prejudice Koon’s civil complaints. In No. 15-7450, Koon also

appeals the district court’s order denying his motions to alter

or set aside the judgment. We have reviewed the records and

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm in both cases

for the reasons stated by the district court. Koon v. Lynch,

No. 4:15-cv-02107-DCN (D.S.C. Aug. 12 & 27, 2015); Koon v.

Lynch, No. 4:15-cv-02349-DCN (D.S.C. Aug. 12, 2015). 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

3