Opinion
No. 14-2015
03-16-2015
GREG P. GIVENS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. OFFICER S. A. ZIMMERMAN, individually and collectively, Defendant - Appellee, and SCOTT R. SMITH, individually and collectively; KEITH C. GAMBLE, individually and collectively; STEPHEN MARK FOWLER, individually and collectively; DAVID LUKE FURBEE, individually and collectively; OFFICER D. L. ROBINSON, individually and collectively; COUNTY OF OHIO, West Virginia, individually and collectively; HONORABLE JAMES P. MAZZONE, individually and collectively; HONORABLE ARTHUR M. RECHT, individually and collectively; HONORABLE RONALD E. WILSON, individually and collectively; KENNETH W. BLAKE, individually and collectively; JULIE L. KREEFER, individually and collectively; TONI VANCAMP, individually and collectively; THE STATE JOURNAL, individually and collectively; SUSAN HAMRICK, individually and collectively, Defendants.
Greg P. Givens, Appellant Pro Se. Deva A. Solomon, STEPTOE & JOHNSON, LLP, Morgantown, West Virginia, for Appellees.
UNPUBLISHED Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., Senior District Judge. (5:12-cv-00155-FPS-JES) Before GREGORY, DIAZ, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Greg P. Givens, Appellant Pro Se. Deva A. Solomon, STEPTOE & JOHNSON, LLP, Morgantown, West Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
Greg P. Givens seeks to appeal the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal for the reasons stated by the district court. Givens v. Zimmerman, No. 5:12-cv-00155-FPS-JES (N.D.W. Va. Aug. 27, 2014). We deny all of Givens' pending motions, including his motions for sanctions, to strike, for consideration of additional issues, and for a hearing. 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.
DISMISSED