Monte Winston v. US

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 3:11-cv-00812-REP Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999340693]. Mailed to: M. Winston. [14-6189]

Download PDF
Appeal: 14-6189 Doc: 10 Filed: 04/22/2014 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-6189 MONTE DECARLOS WINSTON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant – Appellee, and FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; K. ANDERSON, DHD acting on behalf of Federal Bureau of Prisons, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior District Judge. (3:11-cv-00812-REP) Submitted: April 17, 2014 Decided: April 22, 2014 Before WILKINSON, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Monte Decarlos Winston, Appellant Pro Se. Jonathan Holland Hambrick, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Appeal: 14-6189 Doc: 10 Filed: 04/22/2014 Pg: 2 of 3 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 Appeal: 14-6189 Doc: 10 Filed: 04/22/2014 Pg: 3 of 3 PER CURIAM: Monte orders granting dismissing Decarlos summary Winston’s Winston appeals judgment complaint to filed the district the United under the court’s States Federal and Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2671-2680 (2012), and denying Winston’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 60 motion for relief from judgment. reviewed the record and find no reversible error. We have Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Winston v. United States, No. 3:11-cv-00812-REP (E.D. Va. Sept. 10, 2013 & Jan. 27, 2014). 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 3

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?