PER CURIAM.
Lacy Davis appeals from the district court’s orders dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A (2000) and denying his Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b) motion. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Davis v. Unknown Sheriff of Alexandria City Detention Ctr., No. CA-02-680-2 (E.D. Va. Sept. 4, 2002; Sept. 23, 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.