The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
11-7554•Jamie Paul Desper v. Superintendent Jack Lee
11-7554Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitFeb 23, 2012
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-7554
JAMIE PAUL DESPER,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
SUPERINTENDENT JACK LEE; MAJOR LORI NICHOLSON; LT. FRED
BYRD; MR. JOHN LILLY; MAJOR LARRY DULL,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Glen E. Conrad, Chief
District Judge. (7:10-cv-00473-GEC-RSB)
Submitted: February 16, 2012 Decided: February 23, 2012
Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jamie Paul Desper, Appellant Pro Se. Rosalie Fessier,
TIMBERLAKE, SMITH, THOMAS & MOSES, PC, Staunton, Virginia, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Jamie Paul Desper appeals the district court’s order
entering summary judgment on several of the claims raised in his
42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint and dismissing the remainder
of them under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2006). We have reviewed the
record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for
the reasons stated by the district court. Desper v. Lee, No.
7:10-cv-00473-GEC-RSB (W.D. Va. Oct. 20, 2011). 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 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.