¶1 Dan Oliver appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A § 1983 (West Supp.2000) complaint under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915A (West Supp.2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm substantially on the reasoning of the district court. To the extent that Oliver asserts a claim of retaliation, we find that he failed to show an actual injury. Adams v. Rice, 40 F.3d 72, 74-75 (4th Cir.1994); ACLU of Maryland, Inc. v. Wicomico County, 999 F.2d 780, 785 (4th Cir.1993). 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.
¶2 AFFIRMED.