Jotham Simmons v. Jeremiah Beam


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 4:15-cv-03401-RBH Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000062581]. Mailed to: J Simmons. [16-7054]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-7054 Doc: 14 Filed: 04/17/2017 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-7054 JOTHAM SIMMONS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. JEREMIAH BEAM; H. ERIC COHOON; THE CITY OF MYRTLE BEACH, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge. (4:15-cv-03401-RBH) Submitted: March 28, 2017 Before TRAXLER, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jotham Simmons, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Decided: April 17, 2017 Appeal: 16-7054 Doc: 14 Filed: 04/17/2017 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Jotham Simmons, a federal inmate, appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing without prejudice his complaint brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) and Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 394-95 (1971). * We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Simmons v. Beam, No. 4:15-cv-03401-RBH (D.S.C. July 28, 2016). 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 We have jurisdiction over the appeal because Simmons cannot cure by mere amendment the defect identified in his complaint. See Goode v. Cent. Va. Legal Aid Soc’y, Inc., 807 F.3d 619, 623-24 (4th Cir. 2015) (discussing Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir. 1993)). * 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?