Argeni Bataldo-Castillo v. Travis Bragg


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 6:15-cv-03717-RMG Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000034887]. Mailed to: Gibbs, Castillo. [16-6726]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-6726 Doc: 5 Filed: 03/03/2017 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-6726 ARGENI BATALDO-CASTILLO, Petitioner - Appellant, v. WARDEN TRAVIS M. BRAGG, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Richard M. Gergel, District Judge. (6:15-cv-03717-RMG) Submitted: January 30, 2017 Decided: March 3, 2017 Before FLOYD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed as modified by unpublished per curiam opinion. Argeni Bataldo-Castillo, Appellant Pro Se. Christopher Gibbs, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 16-6726 Doc: 5 Filed: 03/03/2017 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Argeni district Bataldo-Castillo, court’s magistrate order judge and (2012) petition. a federal accepting denying prisoner, the relief appeals recommendation on his 28 U.S.C. of the the § 2241 It is undisputed that Bataldo-Castillo did not exhaust his administrative remedies before filing his petition. Although the district court denied Bataldo-Castillo’s petition with prejudice on the merits, we conclude that the dismissal should have been without prejudice for failure to exhaust. Timms v. Johns, Accordingly, we 627 F.3d affirm the 525, 530-31 dismissal (4th order as reflect that the dismissal is without prejudice. § 2106 (2012). Cir. See 2010). modified to See 28 U.S.C. 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 AS MODIFIED 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?