Virginia Goforth v. Harley Lappin
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999650154-2] Originating case number: 1:09-cv-00003 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999787775]. Mailed to: Mr. Goforth 162 Phillipsville Loop Canton, NC 28716 Virginia Arlene Goforth 162 Phillipsville Loop Canton, NC 28716. [15-7360]
Appeal: 15-7360
Doc: 11
Filed: 04/04/2016
Pg: 1 of 4
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-7360
VIRGINIA ARLENE GOFORTH,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
and
MR. GOFORTH, Virginia Arlene Goforth’s Husband and et al,
Plaintiff,
v.
HARLEY G. LAPPIN, Director of Bureau of Prisons; NEWTON
KENDING, Bureau of Prisons Medical Director; AMBER NELSON,
Warden, Alderson Federal Prison Camp; ALICE LOWE, Associate
Warden, Alderson Federal Prison Camp; ALAN BLANKENSHIP,
Health Services Unit Health Administrator, Alderson Federal
Prison Camp; NEAL REHBURG, Doctor of Osteopathy, Alderson
Federal Prison Camp; DEBRA HICKEY, 2006 Warden, Alderson
Federal Prison Camp; DONNA SAFFOLD, 2006 Associate Warden,
Alderson Federal Prison Camp; VICKI DUPREE, Captain,
Alderson Federal Prison Camp; J. ENGLEMAN, Unit Manager, A.
Range, Alderson Federal Prison Camp; CYNTHIA GODBOLD, 2006
Unit Manager, A Range, Alderson Federal Prison Camp (Guard
on Duty); UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, (and specifically
herein),
Defendants - Appellees,
and
THE UNITED STATES SENTENCING COMMISSION, Individually, and
in their official capacity as Custodians/Directors of
Custodians; THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; MICHAEL B.
MUKASEY, United States Attorney General or Predecessor;
Appeal: 15-7360
Doc: 11
Filed: 04/04/2016
UNITED
STATES
INSPECTOR
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,
Pg: 2 of 4
GENERAL;
THE
UNITED
STATES
Defendants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern
District of West Virginia, at Bluefield. David A. Faber, Senior
District Judge. (1:09-cv-00003)
Submitted:
February 29, 2016
Before SHEDD and
Circuit Judge.
FLOYD,
Decided:
Circuit
Judges,
and
April 4, 2016
DAVIS,
Senior
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Virginia Arlene Goforth,
Horn,
Assistant
United
Virginia, for Appellees.
Appellant Pro Se.
States
Attorney,
Stephen Michael
Charleston,
West
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
Appeal: 15-7360
Doc: 11
Filed: 04/04/2016
Pg: 3 of 4
PER CURIAM:
Virginia Arlene Goforth appeals the district court’s orders
accepting
the
recommendations
of
the
magistrate
judge
and
denying relief on her complaint filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six
Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S.
388 (1971), and the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA).
We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error in the district
court’s
grant
rejection
leave
to
of
Goforth’s
proceed
in
FTCA
forma
claim.
pauperis
Accordingly,
and
affirm
we
the
disposition of the FTCA claim for the reasons stated by the
district court.
Goforth v. Lappin, No. 1:09-cv-00003 (S.D. W.
Va. Aug. 14, 2015).
Turning to Goforth’s Bivens claims, we confine our review
on appeal to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief.
4th Cir. R. 34(b).
See
Goforth’s informal brief does not challenge
the bases for the district court’s disposition of her Bivens
claims
—
namely,
individual
demonstrate
needs.
court’s
that
defendants
deliberate
Thus,
order.
Goforth
she
and,
in
failed
any
event,
indifference
has
forfeited
Accordingly,
we
denial of Goforth’s Bivens claims.
3
to
to
properly
that
her
the
failed
serious
appellate
affirm
she
serve
review
district
the
to
medical
of
the
court’s
Appeal: 15-7360
Doc: 11
Filed: 04/04/2016
Pg: 4 of 4
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
4
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?