Richard Tucker v. Russell Helbig
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 8:13-cv-00401-RMG. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999338964]. Mailed to: Richard Tucker. [13-7981]
Appeal: 13-7981
Doc: 9
Filed: 04/18/2014
Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-7981
RICHARD PRICE TUCKER,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
CHAPLAIN RUSSELL HELBIG, sued in his personal-individual
capacity and in his official capacity for injunctive relief,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Anderson. Richard M. Gergel, District Judge.
(8:13-cv-00401-RMG)
Submitted:
April 9, 2014
Decided:
April 18, 2014
Before NIEMEYER and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Richard Price Tucker, Appellant Pro Se. Barbara Murcier Bowens,
Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 13-7981
Doc: 9
Filed: 04/18/2014
Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Richard
Price
Tucker
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), based on his failure to properly exhaust administrative
remedies.
error.
We have reviewed the record and find no reversible
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the
district court.
See Tucker v. Helbig, No. 8:13-cv-00401-RMG
(D.S.C. Dec. 4, 2013).
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
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?