
    Franklin C. REAVES, Reverend, Plaintiff—Appellant, and Maggie Wallace Glover; R.F. Davis, Bishop; Terry Law, Reverend; J. Calvin Thomas; Willie Gladden, Plaintiffs, v. SOUTH CAROLINA DEMOCRATIC PARTY; South Carolina Election Commission; Executive Committee of the South Carolina Democratic Party; Florence County Election Commission; Dillon County Election Commission; Mark Sanford, Governor; Marlboro County Election Commission; Marion County Election Commission, Defendants—Appellees.
    No. 04-2258.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Feb. 23, 2005.
    Decided March 3, 2005.
    Franklin C. Reaves, Appellant pro se. William Norman Nettles, Columbia, South Carolina; Henry Dargan McMaster, Attorney General, Clyde Havird Jones, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, John William McIntosh, Assistant Attorney General, Tracey Colton Green, Office of the Attorney General of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina; Charlie James Blake, Jr., Florence County Attorney’s Office, Florence, South Carolina; Henry Jerome White, Columbia, South Carolina; Lucas C. Padgett, Jr., Michael C. Scarafile, McNair Law Firm, P.A., Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellees.
    Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(e).
   PER CURIAM.

Reverend Franklin C. Reaves appeals from the district court’s order granting summary judgment to defendants and dismissing his complaint in which he alleged violations of the Fifteenth Amendment of the Constitution, as applied through the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (codified as amended at 42 U.S.C. §§ 1971, 1973, 1973c (2000)), and the Due Process Clause and Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Glover v. South Carolina Democratic Party, No. CA-04-2171-4-25 (D.S.C. Sept. 3, 2004). 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. 
      
       Five other plaintiffs were named in the complaint. Rev. Reaves is the only plaintiff who appeals.
     