¶1 Jerry C. Pulley appeals the district court’s order accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and denying relief on his complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000), based on Pulley’s failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Pulley also appeals the magistrate judge’s orders denying his motions to amend the complaint and for the appointment of counsel. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court, see Pulley v. Rubenstein, No. CA-02-1217-5 (S.D.W.Va. Feb. 17, 2004), and by the magistrate judge, see id. (Dec. 10, 2002; Mar. 10, 2003; Aug. 12, 2003). We deny Pulley’s motion for the appointment of counsel and 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.
¶2 AFFIRMED