Kabil Djenasevic v. DOJ
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 5:14-cv-14596. Copies to all parties and the district court. . Mailed to: Appellant. [16-6085]
Pg: 1 of 4
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
KABIL ANTON DJENASEVIC,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE; UNITED STATES FEDERAL
BUREAU OF PRISONS; FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION BECKLEY
HEALTH SERVICE DEPARTMENT; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendants - Appellees,
DR. HUGHES, DDS,
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern
District of West Virginia, at Beckley.
Irene C. Berger,
District Judge. (5:14-cv-14596)
July 20, 2016
August 3, 2016
Before NIEMEYER, AGEE, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded by unpublished
per curiam opinion.
Pg: 2 of 4
Kabil Anton Djenasevic, Appellant Pro Se. Stephen Michael Horn,
Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, West Virginia, for
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 3 of 4
Kabil Anton Djenasevic appeals the district court’s orders
denying relief on his complaint filed under the Federal Tort
Claims Act (FTCA), 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346(b)(1), 2671-2680 (2012),
and denying his request for leave to amend his complaint.
The district court originally rejected Djenasevic’s request
That dismissal was, however, vacated by this court’s
decision in Djenasevic v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 604 F. App’x
328 (4th Cir. June 16, 2015) (No. 15-6076).
On remand, the
court did not directly rule on the request to amend.
should freely give leave [to amend] when justice so requires,”
which we have construed to mean “that leave to amend a pleading
should be denied only when the amendment would be prejudicial to
the opposing party, there has been bad faith on the part of the
Laber v. Harvey, 438 F.3d 404, 426 (4th Cir. 2006) (en banc)
(internal quotation marks omitted).
Because the district court
has not ruled on the merits of Djenasevic’s request to amend, we
Djenasevic’s request and any Government response.
Pg: 4 of 4
Turning to Djenasevic’s FTCA claim, we have reviewed the
record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm the
disposition of that claim for the reasons stated by the district
Djenasevic v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, No. 5:14-cv-14596
(S.D. W. Va. Jan. 11, 2016).
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED IN PART,
VACATED IN PART,
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?