Toby Mackall v. US Department Of Defense

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:17-cv-00774-RDB. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000290051]. Mailed to: Toby Mackall. [17-2435]

Download PDF
Appeal: 17-2435 Doc: 6 Filed: 05/08/2018 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-2435 TOBY ROBERTO MACKALL, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE; CLARK W. LEMASTERS, JR., Major General, U.S. Army, TACOM Commanding General; TIMOTHY D. LUEDECKING, Colonel, U.S. Army, Military Assistant, OUSD ATL; MYRON L. BELL, Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army; MATTHEW D. TOBIN, Major, U.S. Army, Detailed Inspector General, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (1:17-cv-00774-RDB) Submitted: April 26, 2018 Before KING, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Toby Roberto Mackall, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Decided: May 8, 2018 Appeal: 17-2435 Doc: 6 Filed: 05/08/2018 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Toby Roberto Mackall appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his complaint asserting claims under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2671-2680 (2012), and Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Mackall v. Dep’t of Defense, No. 1:17cv-00774-RDB (D. Md. Nov. 20, 2017). 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 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?