ALEXANDER S.; Alfred S.; Benny B.; Christopher M.; Lafayette M.; Ricky S., by and through their Guardian ad Litem; Nancy C. McCormick, Guardian ad Litem, Plaintiffs-Appellees, and Inez Moore Tenenbaum, individually and as representatives of a class of juveniles; Lesly A. Bowers, Guardian ad Litem, Plaintiffs, v. William R. BYARS, in his official capacity as Director of the Department of Juvenile Justice, Defendant-Appellee, Joseph Younginer, Special Master, Appellee, and Gina E. Wood, in her official capacity as Director of the Department of Juvenile Justice; Richard E. McLawhorn, individually and in his official capacity as former Commissioner of the Department of Juvenile Justice for the State of South Carolina; John F. Henry, individually and in his official capacities as a former Board Member for the South Carolina Department of Juvenile Justice; Frank Mauldin, individually and in his official capacity as a former Board Member for the South Carolina Department of Juvenile Justice; Kathleen P. Jennings, individually and in her official capacity as a former Board Member for the South Carolina Department of Juvenile Justice; Joseph W. Hudgens, individually and in his official capacity as a former Board Member of the South Carolina Department of Juvenile Justice; Karole Jensen, individually and in her official capacity as a former Board Member for the South Carolina Department of Juvenile Justice; J.P. Neal, individually and in his official capacity as a former Board Member for the South Carolina Department of Juvenile Justice; South Carolina Department of Youth Services; Flora Brooks Boyd, individually and in her official capacity as Director of the Department of Juvenile Justice; Defendants; Richard A. Harpootlian, Amicus Curiae, v. Vincent F. Rivera, Movant-Appellant. Michael W. Moore, Director of the South Carolina Department of Corrections, Movant, 122 F. App'x 662

PER CURIAM: Vincent F. Rivera appeals from the district court’s orders denying his motion to reopen a district court case or for relief from the judgment, and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Bowers v. Boyd, No. CA-90-3062-3-17 (D.S.C. Aug. 16, 2004 & Oct. 6, 2004); see also Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b). We deny Rivera’s motions to amend the caption and to supplement the record. 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. AFFIRMED