
    Roger Lee MORSE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; Claudia Farr, Director for the Department of Employment Dispute; N.H. Scott, a/k/a Cookie, Deputy Director Administration; Paul Broughton, Human Resources Director; Rufus Fleming, Eastern Region Administrator Director; Gary Bass, Central Regional Administrator Director; David A. Garraghty, Chief Warden; Loretta Kelly, Warden; Al Baskerville, Warden Powhatan Correctional Center; Harry Diggs, Jr., Warden Deep Meadow Correction; Marie Vargo, Warden Sussex II State Prison; William S. Breed, Human Resources Manager; Mack A. Bailey, Major Correctional Officer; William Theachey, Captain Correctional Center; Anthony Cokeley, Captain Correctional Center; Clyde Wright, Lieutenant Correctional Center; Dichille Williams, Lieutenant; Letha R. Hite, Human Resources Officer; Harold Clarke, Current Director of Virginia Department of Corrections, Defendants-Appellees, and Gene M. Johnson, Previous Director for the Virginia Department of Corrections; Ronald J. Angelone, Previous Director of Virginia Department of Corrections, Defendants.
    No. 14-1399.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Oct. 16, 2014.
    Decided: Oct. 20, 2014.
    Roger Lee Morse, Appellant Pro Se. Erin Rose McNeill, Assistant Attorney General, George William Norris, Jr., Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
    Before MOTZ, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
   Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Roger Lee Morse appeals the district court’s order dismissing his complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we grant Morse’s motion to waive filing fees and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Morse v. Virginia Dep’t of Corr., No. 3:13-cv-00361-REP, 2014 WL 1308725 (E.D.Va. Mar. 31, 2014). We deny Morse’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis as moot. 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.  