PER CURIAM.
D’Andre Loverture Jackson appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we grant Jackson’s motion to amend his informal brief and affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Jackson v. Tatro, No. CA-02-928-7 (W.D.Va. Sept. 30, 2002). 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.