JOHN DICKSON JR v. FBI NEWPORT NEWS FIELD OFFICE JOHN JANE DOE TECHNICAL AGENT RICO 18 1962 CITY OF HAMPTON VIRGINIA POLICE DIVISION HOMELAND SECURITY UNIT TECHNICAL POLICE OFFICER JOHN JANE DOE RICO 18 1962 CITY OF NEWPORTNEWS VIRGINIA POLICE DEPARTMENT TECHNICAL POLICE OFFICER JOHN JANE DOE RICO 18 1962 HAMPTON ROADS REGIONAL JAIL AUTHORITY RICO 18 1962 ATTORNEY LAWRENCE DUMVILLE OF NORRIS ST CLAIR LOTKIN ATTORNEYS AT LAW RICO 18 1962 ATTORNEY KENNETH ABRAMS OF MCGUIRE WOODS LLP RICO 18 1962 (2016)

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

JOHN M. DICKSON, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. FBI NEWPORT NEWS FIELD OFFICE, JOHN/JANE DOE(S), TECHNICAL AGENT(S), acting as a person(s) and member(s) of a criminal enterprise under The (RICO) Act of Title 18 U.S. Code 1962; CITY OF HAMPTON VIRGINIA POLICE DIVISION'S HOMELAND SECURITY UNIT, TECHNICAL POLICE OFFICER(S) JOHN/JANE DOE(S), acting as a person(s) and member(s) of a criminal enterprise under The (RICO) Act of Title 18 U.S. Code 1962; CITY OF NEWPORTNEWS VIRGINIA POLICE DEPARTMENT, TECHNICAL POLICE OFFICER(S) JOHN/JANE DOE(S), acting as a person and member of a criminal enterprise under The (RICO) Act of Title 18 U.S. Code 1962; HAMPTON ROADS REGIONAL JAIL AUTHORITY, acting as a person and member of a criminal enterprise under The (RICO) Act of Title 18 U.S. Code 1962; ATTORNEY S. LAWRENCE DUMVILLE OF NORRIS, ST. CLAIR & LOTKIN ATTORNEYS AT LAW, acting as a person and member of a criminal enterprise under The (RICO) Act of Title 18 U.S. Code 1962; ATTORNEY KENNETH W. ABRAMS, OF MCGUIRE WOODS LLP, acting as a person and member of a criminal enterprise under The (RICO) Act of Title 18 U.S. Code 1962, Defendants - Appellees.

No. 16-1368

Decided: August 29, 2016

Before NIEMEYER, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

John M. Dickson, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

John M. Dickson, Jr., appeals the district court's order dismissing his civil complaint as untimely and for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Dickson v. FBI Newport News Field Office, No. 4:15-cv-00124-AWA-DEM (E.D. Va. Mar. 2, 2016). 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

PER CURIAM:

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes

A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.

Go To Learn About The Law