SILVER v. SCOTT (2019)

Douglas E. Silver appeals the district court's order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. See Kerr v. Marshall Univ. Bd. of Governors, 824 F.3d 62, 75 n.13 (4th Cir. 2016) (“[W]e may affirm on any grounds supported by the record, notwithstanding the reasoning of the district court[.]”). Silver's claims against Appellees, both North Carolina state prosecutors, in their individual capacities are barred by absolute prosecutorial immunity. See Safar v. Tingle, 859 F.3d 241, 248-49 (4th Cir. 2017). Silver's claims against Appellees in their official capacities are barred by sovereign immunity. See Nivens v. Gilchrist, 444 F.3d 237, 249 (4th Cir. 2006). Accordingly, we affirm the district court's judgment. 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:

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.