
    Benjamin Ray NABORS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Deputy TIMMONS; Deputy Garrison; Sgt. Kurta; Investigator R. Plaxico, ID # 2022 Investigator LCSD; Sheriff Ricky Chastain, LCSD; Lt. Brian K. Bridges, LCSD Narcotics Officer; Sgt. Justin R. Moody, LCSD Narcotics Officer; Major Hudson, LCDC; Lt. Linda Sullivan, LCDC; Judge W. Copeland, Laurens County Magistrates Office Laurens County; Lt. Mareno Foggie, LCSD Investigator; LCSD Deputy Jamie Lee Edwards; Capt. Stephen Williams, LCSD Capt over Narcotics Officers LCSD; Deputy Matthew A. Veal; Deputy Rhodes; Lt. Marty Crain; Capt. Michael Coats, LCSD; Attorney Caroline Horlbeck, of Greenville Bar SC; Lau-rens County, SC; Alex Stalvey, Attorney at Law SC Bar # 71739; Yates Brown, Jr. SC Bar # 78607; Jerry W. Peace, 8th Circuit Solicitor’s Office Greenwood SC; Paul Page, LCSD Narcotics Officer; South Carolina State Law Enforcement Division, Laurens Counties Office Branch Director Capt SLED; SC Attorney General Salley Wood Elliott; Ms. Elizabeth Patterson Wiygul, SC Bar # 70785; Mr. L. Craine, PP of LCL; Bill Mayor, Attorney SC Bar; Chip Howell, Attorney SC Bar; Mike Turner, Jr., Attorney SC Bar; Sgt. John Bragg, LCDC, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 13-6585.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Aug. 22, 2013.
    Decided: Aug. 26, 2013.
    Benjamin Ray Nabors, Appellant Pro Se.
    Before MOTZ, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
   PER CURIAM:

Benjamin Ray Nabors appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing Nabor’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Nabors v. Timmons, No. 0:12-cv-03301-DCN, 2013 WL 1207060 (D.S.C. Mar. 25 & 26, 2013). We deny the pending motions to appoint counsel. 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.  