Marshall Mitchell v. Mildred Rivera

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for recusal [999760568-2]. Originating case number: 4:13-cv-01949-TMC. Copies to all parties and the district court. [999836891]. Mailed to: Marshall Mitchell. [15-7702]

Download PDF
Appeal: 15-7702 Doc: 23 Filed: 05/31/2016 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-7702 MARSHALL LEE MITCHELL, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MILDRED RIVERA, Warden; SEAN ASHLINE, FS Adm; DOCTOR REED; DOCTOR ENEJE; NURSE RAINWATER, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Timothy M. Cain, District Judge. (4:13-cv-01949-TMC) Submitted: May 26, 2016 Decided: May 31, 2016 Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and NIEMEYER and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Marshall Lee Mitchell, Appellant Bowens, Assistant United States Carolina, for Appellees. Pro Se. Attorney, Barbara Murcier Columbia, South Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 15-7702 Doc: 23 Filed: 05/31/2016 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Marshall Lee Mitchell appeals the district court’s order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(3) motion for reconsideration of the district court’s July 3, 2014 order dismissing Mitchell’s Bivens * action against Defendants. Mitchell has also filed a motion asking that all Judges of this court recuse themselves from his appeal. reversible error. order. have reviewed the record and find no Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s Mitchell v. Rivera, No. 4:13-cv-01949-TMC (D.S.C. Oct. 13, 2015). dispense We We also deny Mitchell’s motion for recusal. with contentions are oral argument adequately because presented in the the facts We and legal materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED * Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). 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?