Filed: Jan. 28, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-2602 BRADLEY C. CARTER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION; LOUIS J. FREEH, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior Dis- trict Judge. (CA-99-439-3) Submitted: January 20, 2000 Decided: January 28, 2000 Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curia
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-2602 BRADLEY C. CARTER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION; LOUIS J. FREEH, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior Dis- trict Judge. (CA-99-439-3) Submitted: January 20, 2000 Decided: January 28, 2000 Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-2602 BRADLEY C. CARTER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION; LOUIS J. FREEH, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior Dis- trict Judge. (CA-99-439-3) Submitted: January 20, 2000 Decided: January 28, 2000 Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bradley C. Carter, Appellant Pro Se. Debra Jean Prillaman, Assis- tant United States Attorney, Deborah C. Stanley, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Bradley C. Carter appeals the district court’s order granting Defendants’ motion to dismiss his complaint filed under the Freedom of Information Act, the Privacy Act, and the Federal Tort Claims Act. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the rea- soning of the district court. See Carter v. Federal Bureau of Investigation, No. CA-99-439-3 (E.D. Va. Oct. 21, 1999). We dis- pense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2