Randy Govan v. SHIRLEY SINGLETON, Disciplinary Hearing Officer, Ridgeland C.I.

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-6776
RANDY GOVAN,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
SHIRLEY SINGLETON, Disciplinary Hearing Officer, Ridgeland
C.I. and Allendale C.I.; LEVERN COHEN, Warden Ridgeland
Correctional Institution; CHRISTOPHER FELDER, Major
Ridgeland Correctional Institution; CARL J. FREDERICK,
Director of Operations, SCDC,
Defendants – Appellees.
No. 09-6891
RANDY GOVAN,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
SHIRLEY SINGLETON, Disciplinary Hearing Officer, Ridgeland
C.I. and Allendale C.I.; LEVERN COHEN, Warden Ridgeland
Correctional Institution; CHRISTOPHER FELDER, Major
Ridgeland Correctional Institution; CARL J. FREDERICK,
Director of Operations, SCDC,
Defendants – Appellees.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the District
of South Carolina, at Anderson. Margaret B. Seymour, District
Judge. (8:07-cv-03789-MBS)

-- 1 of 3 --

Submitted: September 25, 2009 Decided: October 15, 2009
Before MICHAEL and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Randy Govan, Appellant Pro Se. William Henry Davidson, II,
Matthew Blaine Rosbrugh, DAVIDSON & LINDEMANN, PA, Columbia,
South Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

-- 2 of 3 --

3
PER CURIAM:
Randy Govan appeals the district court’s order
accepting in part the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
granting Defendants’ summary judgment motion in Govan’s
42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) civil rights action as well as the
district court’s order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion
to alter or amend that order. We have reviewed the record and
find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the
reasons stated by the district court. Govan v. Singleton, No.
8:07-cv-03789-MBS (D.S.C. Mar. 24, 2009; Apr. 29, 2009). 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

-- 3 of 3 --