Dan Oliver v. K. FOWLKES, Ombudsman

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-7821
DAN OLIVER,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
K. FOWLKES, Ombudsman; JOHN TAYLOR, Warden;
JOE TEEFEY, Institutional Attorney; H. CLARK,
Operational Officer,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chief District
Judge. (CA-99-1485-AM)
Submitted: May 31, 2001 Decided: June 6, 2001
Before WILKINS, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Dan Oliver, Appellant Pro Se. Pamela Anne Sargent, Assistant At-
torney General, Richmond, Virginia; Mark Charles Nanavati, SINNOTT,
NUCKOLS & LOGAN, P.C., Midlothian, Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Dan Oliver appeals the district court’s order denying relief
on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2000) complaint. We have
reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm substantially on the rea-
soning of the district court. Oliver v. Fowlkes, No. CA-99-1485-AM
(E.D. Va. filed Nov. 28, 2000; entered Nov. 29, 2000). With regard
to claims Oliver asserts the district court did not address, we
find that those claims lack merit. We deny Oliver’s motions for a
certificate of appealability, for appointment of counsel, for
extraordinary relief, and for emergency relief. We dispense with
oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequate-
ly presented in the materials before the court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED

-- 2 of 2 --