Antonio Patterson v. Star Conneley, No. 12-7521 (4th Cir. 2013)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-7521 ANTONIO DIEARGO PATTERSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MS. STAR CONNELEY, Medical Supervisor; B. J. THOMAS, IGC Grievance; JON OZMINT, Head Director SCDC; WARDEN MACKIE; DORIS GANTT, Officer; THOMAS MOORE, Medical Director, Defendants Appellees, and BILL BYER, New Head Director of South Carolina Department of Corrections; WAYNE MCCABE, Warden; FRED THOMPSON, Assistant Warden, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Anderson. Richard Mark Gergel, District Judge. (8:11-cv-02834-RMG) Submitted: February 21, 2013 Before AGEE and Circuit Judge. DAVIS, Circuit Decided: February 25, 2013 Judges, Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. and HAMILTON, Senior Antonio Dieargo Patterson, Appellant Pro Se. Rose MacLeod Osborne, Michael Charles Tanner, MICHAEL C. TANNER LAW OFFICE, Bamberg, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Antonio Dieargo Patterson appeals the district court s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge, denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint, denying his motion to amend his complaint, motion to appoint counsel. and denying as moot his Patterson also appeals the district court s text order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion to amend or alter that judgment. find no reversible error. We have reviewed the record and Accordingly, reasons stated by the district court. we affirm for the Patterson v. Conneley, No. 8:11-cv-02834-RMG (D.S.C. July 25, 2012; Aug. 1, 2012). We deny We Patterson s dispense with contentions are motions oral for argument adequately appointment because presented in the the of counsel. facts and legal materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 3

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.