James Ward v. Kuma DeBoo

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:11-cv-00068-IMK-JES Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998959984]. Mailed to: Ward. [12-7189]

Download PDF
Appeal: 12-7189 Doc: 13 Filed: 10/16/2012 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-7189 JAMES I. WARD, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. WARDEN KUMA J. DEBOO; DR. RAMIREZ, Regional Clinical Director; DR. ALLEN, Chief of Health Programs, Central Office; RENDI THOMAS, Designator, Office of Medical Designation and Transportation, Central Office; ELLEN MACELEIBSON, Former Health Service Clinical Director - FCI Gilmer, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, District Judge. (1:11-cv-00068-IMK-JES) Submitted: October 11, 2012 Decided: October 16, 2012 Before KING, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James I. Ward, Appellant Pro Se. Jarod James Douglas, Assistant United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 12-7189 Doc: 13 Filed: 10/16/2012 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: James I. Ward appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his complaint filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Ward v. DeBoo, No. 1:11-cv-00068-IMK-JES (N.D.W. Va. June 20, 2012). facts and materials legal before We dispense with oral argument because the contentions are adequately the and argument court presented would not in the 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?