
    William Lebron Andrew CHURCH, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. U.S. GOVERNMENT; Secretary of Defense; U.S. Attorney General; Robert S. Mueller, Director; Secretary, Veterans Affairs; William J. Daniels, (Bill), Recruiter; General Counsel and Staff; Michael L. Alston, Director, U.S. Department of Justice; John K. Singlaub; Director, Virginia Department of Corrections; R.C. Nixon, Ms.; Terry Glenn, Mr.; Director, Chairman, Virginia Parole Board; C.A. Collins; Virginia Department of Corrections, Ombudsman; June Kim Briel, Inspector General, Virginia Department of Corrections; Virginia Secretary of Public Safety; Thomas W. Warren, Judge, Circuit Court of Amelia County, Virginia; Thomas Stark, Commonwealth Attorney; Lee R. Harrison, Commonwealth Attorney; Attorney General of Virginia; Assistant Attorney General of Virginia; Donald Ford, Jr., Esquire; Graham T. Jennings, Esquire; Hudson, Mr., Esquire; Curtis G. Hudson, Esquire; William Newsome, Esquire; R. Clinton Clary, Jr., Esquire; Chief Judge, Court of Appeals of Virginia; Chief Judge, Supreme Court of Virginia; Richard L. Williams, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia; Karen J. Williams, Circuit Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit; Does Unknown, Unidentified, Defendants—Appellees.
    No. 08-6282.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Sept. 16, 2008.
    Decided: Sept. 19, 2008.
    William Lebrón Andrew Church, Appellant Pro Se.
    Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
   PER CURIAM:

William Lebrón Andrew Church appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Church v. U.S. Gov’t, No. 3:07-cv-00129-HEH (E.D.Va. Jan. 29, 2008). We deny Church’s motions to appoint counsel and for other relief. 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.  