Oliver v. Braxton

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6957 DAN OLIVER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus D. BRAXTON, Warden; KEELING, Assistant Warden; CLARK, Operational Officer; T. FOWLKES, Ombudsman; WILMOUTH, Unit Manager; MR. GIBBS, Unit Manager; LIEUTENANT BARBOUR; TEACHY, Sargeant; R. FLEMMING, Regional Director; G.M. JOHNSON, Deputy Director; WRIGHT, Magistrate, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chief District Judge. (CA-01-568-AM) Submitted: October 3, 2001 Decided: October 17, 2001 Before WILKINS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dan Oliver, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Dan Oliver appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2001) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A (2000). Oliver alleges that in retaliation for filing lawsuits against them, prison officials have barred his access to the grievance process. Even if Defendants refused to file the grievances in retaliation, Oliver has no cognizable injury on the face of the present record. Adams v. Rice, 40 F.3d 72, 75 (4th Cir. 1994); ACLU v. Wicomico County, 999 F.2d 780, 785 (4th Cir. 1993). To the extent that he alleges claims against a state magistrate, such claims are meritless. Pressly v. Gregory, 831 F.2d 514, 517 (4th Cir. 1987) (holding that magistrates enjoy abso- lute immunity for acts performed in judicial capacity). We there- fore affirm the denial of relief under § 1915A. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequate- ly presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2