Pittman v. Portsmouth Sheriff ( 1999 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-6215
ANTHONY ALEXANDER PITTMAN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
PORTSMOUTH CITY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT; THE
JOHNS/JANE DOES, in Classification; MAJOR
BULLOCK; DEPUTY JONES; LIEUTENANT JOHN DOE;
THE JOHNS/JANE DOES that were involved rightly
in securing the incident;
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry C. Morgan, Jr., District
Judge. (CA-98-199)
Submitted: May 25, 1999 Decided: June 2, 1999
Before ERVIN, WILKINS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Anthony Alexander Pittman, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Anthony Alexander Pittman appeals the district court’s order
dismissing his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1998) complaint for
failure to establish administrative exhaustion. We have reviewed
the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district
court. See Pittman v. Portsmouth City Sheriff’s Dep’t, No. CA-98-
199 (E.D. Va. Feb. 2, 1999). We note that the district court dis-
missed the action without prejudice; Pittman will still be subject
to the administrative exhaustion requirement if he chooses to re-
file. See 42 U.S.C.A. § 1997e(a) (West Supp. 1999). 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
2