Karsten Allen v. Larry Fields, No. 22-6473 (4th Cir. 2022)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 22-6473 KARSTEN OBED ALLEN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. LARRY FIELDS, Unit Manager at KMCC; M. G. DESKINS, Lieutenant at KMCC; M. S. BUCKLEN, Lieutenant at KMCC; T. LOWE, Institutional Hearings Officer at KMCC; CARL MANIS, Regional Administrator for the VDOC’s Western Region; A. T. COLLINS, Unit Manager at KMCC, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Pamela Meade Sargent, Magistrate Judge. (7:21-cv-00244-PMS) Submitted: November 17, 2022 Decided: November 22, 2022 Before KING, QUATTLEBAUM, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Karsten Obed Allen, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Karsten Obed Allen, a Virginia inmate, appeals the magistrate judge’s order 1 dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. 2 We have reviewed the record de novo and identified no error in the magistrate judge’s decision to grant Defendants’ Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss. See Mays v. Sprinkle, 992 F.3d 295, 299 (4th Cir. 2021) (stating standard of review for a Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal). Accordingly, we affirm the magistrate judge’s dismissal order. Allen v. Fields, No. 7:21-cv-00244-PMS (W.D. Va. Mar. 25, 2022). 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 The parties consented to jurisdiction before a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73. 1 Although the magistrate judge dismissed Allen’s complaint without prejudice, we conclude that the dismissal order is final and appealable. See Britt v. DeJoy, 45 F.4th 790, 796 (4th Cir. 2022) (en banc) (published order). 2 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.