Mumford v. Harrelson ( 2008 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-1800
THADDAUS MUMFORD,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
LARRY HARRELSON, Deputy Sheriff, individually
and in his official capacity; DALE B. FURR, in
his official capacity; FIDELITY AND DEPOSIT
COMPANY OF MARYLAND, SURETY,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Durham. Wallace W. Dixon,
Magistrate Judge. (1:04-cv-00017-WWD)
Submitted: December 17, 2007 Decided: January 14, 2008
Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Thaddaus Mumford, Appellant Pro Se. Tracy Lynn Eggleston, Paul
Aivars Reichs, COZEN O’CONNOR, Charlotte, North Carolina, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Thaddaus Mumford appeals the order of the magistrate
judge* denying his motion to extend or reopen the appeal period so
that he could appeal the magistrate judge’s order dismissing his 42
U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) action. We have reviewed the record and find
no abuse of discretion. See Thompson v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours &
Co., 76 F.3d 530, 532 n.2 (4th Cir. 1996) (stating standard of
review). Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the
magistrate judge. Mumford v. Harrelson, No. 1:04-cv-00017-WWD
(M.D.N.C. July 25, 2007). 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
*
The parties consented to the exercise of jurisdiction by the
magistrate judge, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2000).
- 2 -