Clayton Vines v. Dr. Inder Gujral, No. 17-6349 (4th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-6349 CLAYTON VINES, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DR. INDER JEET SINGH GUJRAL, Prison Physician, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Arenda L. Wright Allen, District Judge. (2:15-cv-00516-AWA-RJK) Submitted: July 27, 2017 Decided: July 31, 2017 Before AGEE and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Clayton Vines, Appellant Pro Se. Christina Marie Dwyer, Ramon Rodriguez, III, RAWLS, MCNELIS & MITCHELL, PC, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Clayton Vines appeals the district court’s order granting Defendant’s motion for summary judgment in this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. * Vines v. Gujral, No. 2:15-cv-00516-AWA-RJK (E.D. Va. Mar. 2, 2017). 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 * To the extent that Vines seeks to raise new claims on appeal, he fails to demonstrate that exceptional circumstances warrant consideration of those claims. See Pornomo v. United States, 814 F.3d 681, 686 (4th Cir. 2016) (“Absent exceptional circumstances we do not consider issues raised for the first time on appeal.” (ellipsis omitted)). 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.
