¶1 Marc S. Cason, Sr., appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Cason v. Weeks, No. 1:08-cv-00946-CCB (D.Md. May 7, 2008). Because the district court’s dismissal was Cason’s third strike under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (2000) (“PLRA”), * Cason may not proceed in forma pauperis in any civil action or appeal filed while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) (2000). 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.
¶3 Although the district court's order indicates that its dismissal constituted Cason’s second PLRA strike, a review of Cason’s numerous lawsuits reveals that Cason was previously issued two strikes. See Cason v. Maryland Div. of Corr., No. 06-cv-2032 (D.Md. filed Aug. 21, 2006; entered Aug. 22, 2006) (second strike); Cason v. Maryland Div. of Parole and Probation, No. 06-cv1186 (D.Md. May 17, 2006) (first strike).