Opinion
No. 19-1442
11-15-2019
WILLIAM G. CLOWDIS, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. JOEL JEREMY SILVERMAN, M.D.; MCV ASSOCIATED PHYSICIANS, d/b/a MCV Physicians; WILLIAM L. HARP, M.D.; JENNIFER L. DESCHENES, J.D., M.S.; LORETTA S. HOPSON-BUSH; DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH PROFESSIONS VIRGINIA BOARD OF MEDICINE; THE VIRGINIA HEALTH PRACTITIONER'S MONITORING PROGRAM; NATIONAL PRACTITIONER DATABASE; VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY; COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA; VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY HEALTH SYSTEM; AMY STEWART; SHERRY FOSTER, R.N., Defendants - Appellees, and SANDRA WHITLEY RYALS; RENEE S. DIXSON, Defendants.
William G. Clowdis, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth Wu, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia; Erin Laura Barrett, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia; Laura May Hooe, Shyrell Antwinique Reed, MORAN, REEVES & CONN, PC, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
UNPUBLISHED
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior District Judge. (3:15-cv-00128-REP) Before WYNN and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William G. Clowdis, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth Wu, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia; Erin Laura Barrett, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia; Laura May Hooe, Shyrell Antwinique Reed, MORAN, REEVES & CONN, PC, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
William G. Clowdis, Jr., appeals the district court's order granting Defendants' motions to dismiss. Clowdis also appeals the denial of his motions to vacate and to amend. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Clowdis v. Silverman, No. 3:15-cv-00128-REP (E.D. Va. Mar. 28, 2019). We deny Clowdis's motion to appoint counsel. 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