Ballard v. Chairman, Virginia Parole Board ( 2003 )

PER CURIAM.

Mario Ballard appeals the magistrate judge’s order denying his motion to amend his complaint in an action that was closed. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the magistrate judge. See Ballard v. Chairman, Va. Parole Bd., No. CA-01-235-7 (W.D.Va. Sept. 30, 2002). Ballard’s motion for hearing en banc is denied. 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.