Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Andrew Straw v. United States, 20-1787 (2020)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 20-1787 Visitors: 12
Filed: Sep. 24, 2020
Latest Update: Sep. 24, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 20-1787 ANDREW U.D. STRAW, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. J. Michelle Childs, District Judge. (3:19-cv-02531-JMC) Submitted: September 22, 2020 Decided: September 24, 2020 Before NIEMEYER, KEENAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Andrew U.D. Straw, Appell
More
                                    UNPUBLISHED

                       UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                                      No. 20-1787


ANDREW U.D. STRAW,

                    Plaintiff - Appellant,

             v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                    Defendant - Appellee.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
Columbia. J. Michelle Childs, District Judge. (3:19-cv-02531-JMC)


Submitted: September 22, 2020                               Decided: September 24, 2020


Before NIEMEYER, KEENAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.


Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Andrew U.D. Straw, Appellant Pro Se.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

       Andrew U. D. Straw appeals the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice

his complaint based on Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal 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. Straw v. United States,

No. 3:19-cv-02531-JMC (D.S.C. June 29, 2020). 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


Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer