Categories: Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals Opinions

RAINEY v. FORD, 235 Fed.Appx. 121 (4th Cir. 2007)

Jerome W. RAINEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Lieutenant FORD; Sergeant Powell, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 06-8027.United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.Submitted: July 23, 2007.
Decided: August 3, 2007.

[EDITOR’S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (2:06-cv-02267-GRA).

Jerome W. Rainey, Appellant Pro Se. Benjamin Albert Baroody, Samuel F. Arthur, III, Aiken, Bridges, Nunn, Elliott Tyler, PA, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Before MOTZ and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Jerome W. Rainey appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint as moot. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. We affirm the district court’s judgment, however, on the modified grounds that Rainey failed to establish he received more than de minimus injuries as a result of the alleged use of excessive force. See Norman v. Taylor, 25 F.3d 1259, 1263 (4th Cir. 1994). We grant the Appellees’ motion to strike Rainey’s exhibits one through ten attached to his informal brief. We deny Rainey’s pro se motion to vacate and remand. 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.

jdjungle