Steven Byrd v. Federal Bureau of Prisons

Filing 402827326

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 2:08-cv-03540-TLW. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998351800] [09-7878]

Download PDF
Steven Byrd v. Federal Bureau of Prisons Doc. 402827326 Case: 09-7878 Document: 12 Date Filed: 06/03/2010 Page: 1 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-7878 STEVEN ALLEN BYRD, Plaintiff ­ Appellant, v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; MILDRED RIVERA, Warden; ZOLTAN R. VENDEL, Dr., Clinical Director; ANITA JONES, Camp Administrator, Defendants ­ Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Terry L. Wooten, District Judge. (2:08-cv-03540-TLW) Submitted: May 17, 2010 Decided: June 3, 2010 Before KING and Circuit Judge. SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Steven Allen Byrd, Appellant Pro Se. Beth Drake, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Dockets.Justia.com Case: 09-7878 Document: 12 Date Filed: 06/03/2010 Page: 2 PER CURIAM: Steven accepting Defendants the Byrd appeals the district court's to which order grant the magistrate judge's on recommendation Byrd's claims, summary judgment magistrate judge construed as being filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). error. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the Byrd v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, No. 2:08-cvSept. 25, 2009). We dispense with oral district court. 03540-TLW (D.S.C. 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 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?