Bernard Ray Richardson v. Doctor Dulanes

16-6906Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJun 1, 2017

Full text

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-6906
BERNARD RAY RICHARDSON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
DOCTOR DULANES; N. STANFORD, Head Nurse W.R.S.P.; LESLIE J.
FLEMING, Warden W.R.S.P.; B. R. RAVIZEE, Grievance Coordinator W.R.S.P.;
R. H. BIVENS, Grievance Coordinator Western Regional Administrator Office; C.
L. PARR, Grievance Coordinator Western Regional Administrator Office; NURSE
BLEDSOE, W.R.S.P.; H. C. RAY, Virginia Department of Corrections Director of
Health Services; NAME UNKNOWN, Va D.O.C. Director of Health Services,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (1:16-cv-00356-JCC-TCB)
Submitted: May 18, 2017 Decided: June 1, 2017
Before DUNCAN and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Bernard Ray Richardson, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Bernard Ray Richardson appeals from the district court’s orders denying his request
to proceed without prepayment of the filing fee and denying his motion for reconsideration.
The district court found that Richardson did not make a sufficient showing that he was
under imminent danger of serious physical injury and dismissed his 42 U.S.C. § 1983
(2012) complaint without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) (2012). We have
reviewed the record, including the dismissal orders identified as qualifying strikes pursuant
to § 1915(g), and find no reversible error. Accordingly, while we grant leave to proceed
on appeal in forma pauperis, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.
Richardson v. Dulanes, No. 1:16-cv-00356-JCC-TCB (E.D. Va. Apr. 12, 2016 & June 1,
2016). 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

-- 2 of 2 --

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.