
    Gregory BARTKO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Clay Campbell WHEELER; Scott B. Hollenbeck; George E.B. Holding, Individually and as United States Attorney, for the Eastern District of North Carolina; U.S. Attorney Thomas G. Walker, Individually and as United States Attorney for the Eastern District of North Carolina, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 14-7184.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Decided: Jan. 15, 2015.
    Submitted: Dec. 31, 2014.
    Gregory Bartko, Appellant Pro Se.
    Before AGEE, KEENAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
   Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Gregory Bartko appeals the district court’s orders transferring this action to the Eastern District of North Carolina, denying his recusal motion, and dismissing his complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. As to Bartko’s recusal motion, we conclude that the district court’s failure to “pass on the1 legal sufficiency of the facts alleged” in Bartko’s 28 U.S.C. § 144 (2012) declaration is not reversible error because the affidavit was insufficient as a matter of law. Sine v. Local No. 992 Int’l Bind, of Teamsters, 882 F.2d 913, 914 (4th Cir. 1989). We affirm the transfer order and the dismissal of the complaint for the reasons stated by the district court. Bartko v. Wheeler, No. 5:14-ct-03043-D, 2014 WL 3563359 (E.D.N.C. July 18, 2014); Bartko v. Wheeler, No. l:13-cv-01006-JAB-LPA (M.D.N.C. Feb. 10, 2014). We grant Bart-ko’s motion to exceed the length limitations for his informal brief. 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.  