William Harrison v. Harrell Watts

Filing 920091104

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-6696

WILLIAM HENRY HARRISON, a/k/a Allah-God Allah, and others similarly situated, Plaintiff - Appellant, v.

Kundalini

Isa

HARRELL WATTS, Administrator, National Inmate Appeals, Federal BOP; HARLEY G. LAPPIN, Director, Federal BOP; KIMBERLEY WHITE, Regional Administrator, Inmate Appeals, Federal BOP, Mid-Atlantic Region; VANESSA P. ADAMS, Warden, Petersburg FCC, Federal BOP; JESUS M. HUERTAS, Supervisory Chaplain, Petersburg FCC, Federal BOP; MRS. BROWDER, Accoc. Chaplain, FCC Petersburg [medium] Federal BOP, Defendants ­ Appellees.

No. 09-7180

WILLIAM HENRY HARRISON, a/k/a Allah-God Allah, and others similarly situated, Plaintiff - Appellant, v.

Kundalini

Isa

HARRELL WATTS, Administrator, National Inmate Appeals, Federal BOP; HARLEY G. LAPPIN, Director, Federal BOP; KIMBERLEY WHITE, Regional Administrator, Inmate Appeals, Federal BOP, Mid-Atlantic Region; VANESSA P. ADAMS, Warden, Petersburg FCC, Federal BOP; JESUS M. HUERTAS, Supervisory Chaplain, Petersburg FCC, Federal BOP; MRS. BROWDER, Accoc. Chaplain, FCC Petersburg [medium] Federal BOP, Defendants ­ Appellees.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, Senior District Judge. (1:06-cv-01061-TSE-TCB)

Submitted:

September 24, 2009

Decided:

November 4, 2009

Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

William Henry Harrison, Appellant Pro Se. Monika L. Moore, Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

PER CURIAM: William Harrison appeals the district court's order

granting the Defendants' motion to dismiss Harrison's complaint pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), and denying reconsideration of that order. error. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible

Accordingly, we affirm the court's order granting the motion to With dismiss respect for to the the reasons district stated court's by the

Defendants' district

court.

order

denying reconsideration of that order, Harrison has forfeited appellate review of that order pursuant to 4th Cir. R. 34(b) and we therefore affirm that order. Harrison v. Watts, No. We we

1:06-cv-01061-TSE-TCB (E.D. Va. Mar. 26 & June 9, 2009). also deny Harrison's with oral motion to schedule because oral argument and as

dispense

argument

the

facts

legal

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

3