Meyer v. Hinkle

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-7310 LARRY MEYER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus GEORGE M. HINKLE, Warden, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (CA-99-173-2) Submitted: February 29, 2000 Decided: March 27, 2000 Before MURNAGHAN, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Larry Meyer, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Larry Meyer appeals the district court's orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1999) complaint, and the district court’s order denying both his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) mo- tion for reconsideration and his motion to amend. However, because the sole issue Meyer raised in his informal brief relates to the district court’s denial of his motion to amend, we have limited our review to that issue. See Local Rule 34(b). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion relating to the denial of Meyer’s motion to amend and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Meyer v. Hinkle, No. CA-99-173-2 (E.D. Va. Sept. 15, 1999). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2