RUTLEDGE v. ROACH

PER CURIAM:

Merle T. Rutledge, Jr., appeals the district court's orders dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint and denying his motion to amend his complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Rutledge v. Roach, No. 4:10-cv-00035-JLK-MFU, 2010 WL 3835662 (W.D.Va. Sept. 30, 2010) 2010 WL 4791840 (Nov. 18, 2010). 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.