Gregory Shawn MERCER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. FAIRFAX COUNTY CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES, (FCCPS); Fairfax County Department of Code Compliance, (FCDCC); Elizabeth Perry, FCDCC Supervisor On 3/5/14; Jack Blair, FCDCC Employee On 3/5/14; Latycia Tanks, FCDCC Employee On 3/5/14; Kerry S. Allander, Virginia State Police Supervisor On 6/9/06; Kenneth S. Houtz, Virginia State Trooper On 6/9/06; Kathleen H. MacKay, Fairfax County Circuit Court Judge On 6/22/07; Elizabeth A. McClananhan, Court of Appels of VA Judge On 2/18/09; Lawrence L. Koontz, Supreme Court Of Virginia Judge On 9/22/09; Donald W. Lemon, Supreme Court Of Virginia Judge On 9/22/09; Leroy F. Millette, Supreme Court Of Virginia Judge On 9/22/09; S. BERNARD GOODWYN, Supreme Court Of Virginia Judge On 9/22/09; ALECIA WASKLEWICZ, FCCPS Supervisor On 3/6/14; Fairfax County Board of Supervisors, (FCBoS); SHARON BULOVA, Chairman Of Fairfax County Board Of Supervisors, Defendants-Appellees, and Alicia Wasklewics, FCCPS Supervisor On 3/6/14; Tanya E. Powers, FCCPS Social Worker On 3/6/14; Walter S. Felton, Jr., Court Of Appeals Of Virginia Judge On 2/18/09; Larry G. Elder, Court Of Appeals Of Virginia Judge On 2/18/09; Leroy R. Hassell, Sr., Deceased Supreme Court Of Virginia Judge, 2/9/11; Barbara M. Keenan, Supreme Court Of Virginia Judge On 9/22/09; Cynthia D. Kinser, Supreme Court Of Virginia Judge On 9/22/09, Defendants, 673 F. App'x 358

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Gregory Shawn Mercer appeals the district court’s orders dismissing this 42 U.S.C. § 1988 (2012) action 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. Mercer v. Fairfax Cnty. Child Protective Servs., No. 1:15-cv-00302-LO-TCB (E.D. Va. Aug. 25 & Dec. 17, 2015; Feb. 11, 2016). The motions- to compel, for a subpoena, to clarify, and to direct a state judge to verify a record’s existence are denied.

We grant the motions to exceed the length limitations for the brief and to file amended and supplemental informal reply briefs and amendments. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED