UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-7135
MICHAEL L. WARDLOW,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
RICHARD NEELY, Superintendent; LAWRENCE PARSONS, Assist.
Superintendent; KORY DALRYMPLE, Assist. Superintendent of
Programs; DENNIS MARSHALL, Assist. Unit Mgr.; LISA MARTIN,
Captain; LIEUTENANT WHITE; JOHN DOE; TODD PINION,
Superintendent/Correctional Administrator; CHRIS BIRD,
Nurse; SAMMY HASSAN, Doctor; E. WALRATH, Nurse,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert J. Conrad,
Jr., Chief District Judge. (3:11-cv-00596-RJC)
Submitted: October 11, 2012 Decided: October 16, 2012
Before KING, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael L. Wardlow, Appellant Pro Se. Lisa Yvette Harper,
Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Michael L. Wardlow appeals the district court’s order
dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) action for failure to
exhaust administrative remedies. We have reviewed the record
and find no reversible error in the district court’s exhaustion
ruling, based on the record before it. See Fed. R. App. P.
10(a) (the record on appeal consists only of a certified copy of
the docket, the transcripts of any proceedings, and the original
papers and exhibits filed in the district court). *
Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district
court. 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
*
To the extent that Wardlow’s amended complaint contended
that a prison guard violated the Eighth Amendment while placing
Wardlow in segregation, we note that it fails to allege that the
guard applied any force “maliciously and sadistically for the
very purpose of causing harm” rather than “in a good-faith
effort to maintain or restore discipline.” Whitley v. Albers,
475 U.S. 312, 320-21 (1986) (internal quotation marks omitted);
see also Hudson v. McMillian, 503 U.S. 1, 7 (1992) (noting the
factors applicable to determining whether a prison official has
acted with the requisitely culpable state of mind). As a
result, even if Wardlow exhausted his administrative remedies as
to this claim, it was nonetheless properly dismissed.
2