
    Andrew CHIEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. LECLAIRRYAN; William K. Grogan & Associates; William K. Grogan, Defendants-Appellees, and Chesterfield County, Defendant.
    No. 13-8017.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: April 17, 2014.
    Decided: April 21, 2014.
    Andrew Chien, Appellant Pro Se. Joseph Michael Rainsbury, Leelair Ryan, PC, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellees.
    Before WILKINSON, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
   Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Andrew Chien appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s dismissal of the claims against Le-Clair Ryan and William K. Grogan & Associates for the reasons stated by the district court. Chien v. Chesterfield Cty., No. 1:13-cv-00993-LO-IDD (E.D.Va. filed Nov. 6, entered Nov. 7, 2013). We affirm the district court’s dismissal of the claims against William Grogan in his capacity as a Commissioner in Chancery on alternative grounds. See MM ex rel. DM v. School Dist. of Greenville Cnty., 303 F.3d 523, 536 (4th Cir.2002). While Grogan was a state actor, he is entitled to judicial immunity for actions taken within the scope of his official duties. See Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349, 362, 98 S.Ct. 1099, 55 L.Ed.2d 331 (1978) (defining factors used to determine whether an action is a judicial act). We deny Chien’s motion to expedite this decision. 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.  