Charles K Btyson v. Dir., Dep’t of Corr., 434 U.S. 257, 264 1978

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-6494
CHARLES K B TYSON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
JON E. OZMINT, Director,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Greenville. Patrick Michael Duffy, District
Judge. (6:06-cv-00385)
Submitted: September 14, 2007 Decided: September 21, 2007
Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Charles K B Tyson, Appellant Pro Se. Ruskin C. Foster, Charles
Jonathan Bridgmon, MCCUTCHEN, BLANTON, JOHNSON & BARNETTE, LLP,
Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

*To the extent Tyson seeks to appeal the district court’s
separate order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge
and denying his motion for a preliminary injunction or temporary
restraining order, we note that Tyson’s notice of appeal was not
timely filed and he failed to timely obtain a reopening of the
appeal period. See Browder v. Dir., Dep’t of Corr., 434 U.S. 257,
264 (1978); Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), (a)(6). We therefore lack
jurisdiction to review that order.
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Charles Tyson appeals the district court’s order
modifying the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing
Tyson’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint without prejudice for
failure to exhaust administrative remedies. * We have reviewed the
record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the
reasoning of the district court. See Tyson v. Ozmint, No. 6:06-cv-
00385 (D.S.C. Mar. 1, 2007). We deny as moot Tyson’s motions to
consolidate and to stay the case. 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

-- 2 of 2 --