Opinion
22-7048
04-11-2023
JEAN GERMAIN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. WILLIAM BEEMAN, RN; HOWARD COOK, Dr.; JOHN DOE, Dr.; JANE DOE, RN; KELLY NATALE, RN, Defendants - Appellees.
Jean Bernard Germain, Appellant Pro Se. Megan Trocki Mantzavinos, MARKS, O'NEILL, O'BRIEN, DOHERTY & KELLY, P.C., Towson, Maryland; Christina Nicole Billiet, Michelle Lynn Davidson Dian, WARANCH &BROWN, LLC, Lutherville, Maryland, for Appellees.
UNPUBLISHED
Submitted: March 15, 2023
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Stephanie A. Gallagher, District Judge. (1:21-cv-02279-SAG)
Jean Bernard Germain, Appellant Pro Se.
Megan Trocki Mantzavinos, MARKS, O'NEILL, O'BRIEN, DOHERTY & KELLY, P.C., Towson, Maryland; Christina Nicole Billiet, Michelle Lynn Davidson Dian, WARANCH &BROWN, LLC, Lutherville, Maryland, for Appellees.
Before KING and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM
Jean Germain appeals the district court's orders granting summary judgment to the Defendants and dismissing his civil rights complaint. Germain contends that the court erred by not permitting further discovery and by granting summary judgment to Kelly Natale on his claim that she was deliberately indifferent to his medical needs. We affirm.
We conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Germain's motion for further discovery. See Gordon v. CIGNA Corp., 890 F.3d 463, 478 (4th Cir. 2018) (stating standard of review). We have reviewed de novo the district court's order granting summary judgment and conclude that there is no genuine dispute of material fact about Germain's claim against Natale. See Knibbs v. Momphard, 30 F.4th 200, 213 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 143 S.Ct. 303 (2022) (stating standard of review).
Accordingly, we affirm. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED.