Doran Bowers v. Rory Perry, No. 16-1713 (4th Cir. 2016)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-1713 DORAN BOWERS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. RORY PERRY; ROBIN DAVIS; BRENT BENJAMIN; MARGARET WORKMAN; MENIS KETCHUM; ALLEN LOUGHRY; THE STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA; GREGORY HILTON; PETER KRAUSER; ALEXANDER WRIGHT; ALBERT MATRICCIANI; CHARLES MOYLAN; LAWRENCE RODOWSKY; ROBERT BELL; MARY ELLEN BARBERA; GLEN HARELL; LYNNE BATTAGLIA; CLAYTON GREENE; SALLY ATKINS; ROBERT MCDONALD; SHIRLEY WATTS, and; THE STATE OF MARYLAND; KATTHLEEN COX, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Charleston. Joseph R. Goodwin, District Judge. (2:14-cv-27242) Submitted: November 17, 2016 Before GREGORY, Judges. Chief Judge, Decided: and MOTZ and November 21, 2016 TRAXLER, Circuit Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Doran Bowers, Appellant Pro Se. Teresa Jean Lyons, HEDGES & LYONS, PLLC, Morgantown, West Virginia; Michele J. McDonald, Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Doran Bowers appeals the district court’s orders adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and dismissing with prejudice Bowers’ civil action, and denying Bowers’ Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion to alter or amend that judgment. reviewed the record and find no reversible error. We have Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Bowers v. Perry, No. 2:14-cv-27242 (S.D.W. Va. Sept. 28, 2015 & June 16, 2016). We deny Bowers’ motions to correct the docket, to recuse the Clerk of Court, and to amend or correct prior orders entered by the Clerk. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2

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.