Dehoney v. Maynard, (4th Cir. 2003)

Text

---

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-6800 MICHAEL F. DEHONEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus

GARY MAYNARD; JOYCE LAWTON; COCIE RUSHTON, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Anderson. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge.

(CA-02-321)

Submitted: August 14, 2003 Decided: August 21, 2003

Before WILLIAMS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael F. Dehoney, Appellant Pro Se. John Evans James, III, LEE,

ERTER, WILSON, JAMES, HOLLER & SMITH, L.L.C., Sumter, South

Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM

Michael F. Dehoney appeals the district court§ 1983 (2000) complaint without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies and the order denying the motion for reconsideration. The district court properly required exhaustion of administrative remedies under 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a) (2000). Because Dehoney did not demonstrate to the district court that he had exhausted administrative remedies or that such remedies were not available, the courtÂ’s dismissal of the action, without prejudice, was not an abuse of discretion. Accordingly, we affirm the district courtÂ’s orders. 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

---