CourtsUnited States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit2005Michael Ray HARVEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Daniel T. MAHON; David A. Smith, Assistant Warden, H.C.C.; J. Redd, Segregation Counselor, H.C.C.; C/O Butler, H.C.C.; King, Medical Doctor, H.C.C.; V. Evans, Segregation Unit, H.C.C.; William Rodgers, Regional Administrator Central Region, Vdoc; L. Dotson, Warden, L.C.C.; Davis, C.C.A.; D.A. Braxton, Rosp; S. Fleenor, Grievance Coordinator at Rosp, Vdoc; John Doe, I, Person named unknown at C.C.A., Vdoc, employee at C.C.A.; John Doe, II, Person named unknown at C.C.A., Vdoc, employee of C. C.A.; John Doe, III, Person named unknown at C.C.A., employee head of Medical Staff; John Doe, IV, Person unknown at Vdoc, Director of Medical Services, and Medical Policy of D. O.C.; Virginia Department of Corrections; R. Fleming, Major; J.K. Vaughn; R.T. Coker; V. Smith, Doctor; Rufus Fleming; Paul Williams, Defendants-Appellees

Michael Ray HARVEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Daniel T. MAHON; David A. Smith, Assistant Warden, H.C.C.; J. Redd, Segregation Counselor, H.C.C.; C/O Butler, H.C.C.; King, Medical Doctor, H.C.C.; V. Evans, Segregation Unit, H.C.C.; William Rodgers, Regional Administrator Central Region, Vdoc; L. Dotson, Warden, L.C.C.; Davis, C.C.A.; D.A. Braxton, Rosp; S. Fleenor, Grievance Coordinator at Rosp, Vdoc; John Doe, I, Person named unknown at C.C.A., Vdoc, employee at C.C.A.; John Doe, II, Person named unknown at C.C.A., Vdoc, employee of C. C.A.; John Doe, III, Person named unknown at C.C.A., employee head of Medical Staff; John Doe, IV, Person unknown at Vdoc, Director of Medical Services, and Medical Policy of D. O.C.; Virginia Department of Corrections; R. Fleming, Major; J.K. Vaughn; R.T. Coker; V. Smith, Doctor; Rufus Fleming; Paul Williams, Defendants-Appellees

United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit2005-04-27No. No. 04-7466

126 F. App'x 632

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion · public domain

majority opinion

PER CURIAM.

Michael Ray Harvey appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Harvev v. Mahon, No. CA-02-829-7-JLK (filed Aug. 30, 2004; entered Aug. 31, 2004). We grant the motions to file an oversize brief and a supplemental informal reply brief and 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. The motions for appointment of counsel, a preliminary injunction, a temporary restrain ing order, and a permanent injunction are denied.

AFFIRMED