FILED
United States Court of Appeals
Tenth Circuit

August 3, 2005

PATRICK FISHER
Clerk

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

JERALD C. LEECH,		
		Plaintiff-Appellant,	No. 04-6350	
v.	(D.C. No. 04-CV-253-F)	
DUANE ANDREWS, Detective; BRIAN O’ROURKE, Sergeant; BOB PRITCHETT, Officer; and DAVID FARROW, Lieutenant,	(W. D. Oklahoma)	
		Defendants-Appellees,

	and

KIRK ROGERS, District 1, DA Investigator; ENID OKLAHOMA POLICE DEPARTMENT TACTICAL TEAM; NARCOTICS ENFORCEMENT UNIT, Perry, Oklahoma Police Dept.,

		Defendants.	

			

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

		
Before EBEL, McKAY, and HENRY, Circuit Judges.

	After examining the briefs and the appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal.  See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G).  The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
	This is a pro se civil rights appeal pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.  In his complaint to the district court, Mr. Leech asserted that his civil rights were violated by various officers from the City of Enid Police Department (Defendants) when they conducted a search of his home in November of 1999.  Mr. Leech claims Defendants violated his Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable searches and seizures when they executed a search of his home.  Defendants allegedly failed to obtain a valid search warrant.  Adopting the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation, the district court dismissed Mr. Leech’s complaint because he failed to bring his claim within the applicable statute of limitations, and entered judgment in Defendants’ favor.  Mr. Leech appeals to this court. 
	After a thorough review of the briefs, the district court’s order, the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation, and the record on appeal, and for substantially the same reasons set forth in the magistrate judge’s well-reasoned September 27, 2004, Report and Recommendation, which the district court adopted on October 8, 2004, in its order and judgment of dismissal, we hold that no relief is available to Mr. Leech pursuant to § 1983. 
	The decision of the district court is AFFIRMED.
							Entered for the Court

							Monroe G. McKay
							Circuit Judge