Nathaniel Simmons v. Charles Williams
Nathaniel Simmons v. Charles Williams
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 19-6989
NATHANIEL SIMMONS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
CHARLES WILLIAMS; THOMAS ROBERTSON; ALYSON GLADWELL; STEPHANIE MARSHALL; STANLEY TERRY; CLARISSA JONES; JUANITA MOSS; BELL; MYERS; BEARD; WILLIE F. SMITH; SHERMAN L. ANDERSON; JENNIFER FRANKLIN; SHAKIRA WILLIAMS; MICHELLE CHAMBERS, a/k/a Michelle Chamber; TIM E. ROGERS; DEBORAH RICHTER; VICTORIA NORMAN; ASHLEY MADDOX; CYNTHIA DARDEN; KENNARD DUBOSE; BRYAN P. STIRLING,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior District Judge. (0:19-cv-00317-HMH)
Submitted: November 19, 2019 Decided: November 22, 2019
Before WILKINSON and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Nathaniel Simmons, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
Nathaniel Simmons appeals the district court’s orders adopting the recommendation
of the magistrate judge and dismissing his
42 U.S.C. § 1983(2012) civil action for failure
to state a claim, denying his motion to amend, and denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion
to alter or amend judgment. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Simmons v. Williams,
No. 0:19-cv-00317-HMH (D.S.C. June 4 & 24, 2019). 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
2
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished