Francis C. Mbewe v. UNKNOWN NAMES, (MCDCR) Montgomery County Department of Correction

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-6059
FRANCIS C. MBEWE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
UNKNOWN NAMES, (MCDCR) Montgomery County Department of
Correction and Rehabilitation Mail Room Clerks; DAVID, Cpt.,
Head of Montgomery County Department of Correction and
Rehabilitation (MCDCR) Mail Room; RICHARD DOVEY, C.O.S.,
Chief of Security of MCI-H; RICHARD, C.O. II, former
Property Room Officer of MCI-H; WACH, Mr., Case Manager;
STEVENUS, Ms., Librarian, MCI-H; MCI-H; MCDCR MAIL ROOM,
Defendants - Appellees,
and
STOUFFER, C.D.C, Head of Correction for the State of
Maryland; SOWERS, Warden (former) m MCI-H; WEBB, Warden,
MCI-H; SCOTT, MJ, Shift Commander, MCI-H; CLEVENGER, C.O.
II, Tier Officer for B2; WILLIAMS, Lt., Unit Manager of
Northside MCI-H; POWELL, Lt., former Unit Manager of
Northside MCI-H; VINSON, C.O. II, Dietary Officer of MCI-H;
WORGUL, C.O. II, Dietary Officer of MCI-H; HULL, Cpt.,
Dietary Manager of MCI-H,
Defendants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District
Judge. (8:12-cv-03344-AW)
Submitted: April 17, 2014 Decided: April 22, 2014

-- 1 of 3 --

2
Before WILKINSON, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Francis C. Mbewe, Appellant Pro Se. Silvia Carolina Kinch,
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY, Rockville, Maryland; Siobhan
Kelly Madison, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND,
Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 2 of 3 --

3
PER CURIAM:
Francis C. Mbewe appeals the district court’s order
dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint against the
Appellees for failing to state a claim. We have reviewed the
record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for
the reasons stated by the district court. Mbewe v. Unknown
Names, No. 8:12-cv-03344-AW (D. Md. Dec. 3, 2013). 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

-- 3 of 3 --