
    Nathaniel Dante RICE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Daymon BYRD, Senior Officer; Officer Highlander; Officer Quinn; Officer McHenry; Lieutenant Vargas, Defendants-Appellees, and Officer John Doe; United States of America; Officer Singleton; Officer O’Bryant; Lieutenant Wright; Lieutenant Craddock; Lieutenant Murphy; Lieutenant Gerald; Unit Manager Camacho; Associate Warden Hiscocks; Counselor Hopkins; Counsel Lassiter; Counselor Daughety; Counsel Brooks; PA Derry; PA Lecu-rie; PA/Officer Canada; Nurse Carter; Officer Torres; Officer Keller; Officer Rock; Officer McGee; Officer Goolsby; Officer Andersonmic; Officer Smithwill; Officer Newsome; Officer Sanford; Officer Staten; Officer Arias; Officer Glass; Officer Klux; Officer Perry; Officer Bullock; Officer Woods; Officer Fanuef; Mid-Atlantic Remedy Coordinator; Central Office Coordinator; Administrator Coordinator, at Butner FCI 2; Administrator Coordinator, at Talladega FCI; Health Services. Administrator; Assistant Health Services Administrator Kilpatrick; Regional Director, in official capacity; General Counsel, in official capacity; Director of Bureau of Prisons, in official capacity; Federal Bureau of Prisons, Defendants.
    
      No. 15-6288.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Aug. 27, 2015.
    Decided: Aug. 31, 2015.
    Nathaniel Dante Rice, Appellant Pro Se. Christina Ann Kelley, Bureau of Prisons, Butner, NC, for Appellees.
    Before GREGORY, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
   Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Nathaniel Dante Rice appeals the district court’s orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Rice v. Byrd, No. 5:ll-ct-03218-BO (E.D.N.C. Aug. 21, 2013 & Feb. 12, 2015). We dispense with oral argüment because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.  