Filed: Aug. 03, 2005
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-6188 MARIO HOWARD LLOYD, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant - Appellee, and HENRY LUSK, Food Administrator, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge. (CA-02-3291-2-27-AJ) Submitted: July 27, 2005 Decided: August 3, 2005 Before KING, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-6188 MARIO HOWARD LLOYD, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant - Appellee, and HENRY LUSK, Food Administrator, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge. (CA-02-3291-2-27-AJ) Submitted: July 27, 2005 Decided: August 3, 2005 Before KING, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per c..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-6188
MARIO HOWARD LLOYD,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant - Appellee,
and
HENRY LUSK, Food Administrator,
Defendant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Charleston. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge.
(CA-02-3291-2-27-AJ)
Submitted: July 27, 2005 Decided: August 3, 2005
Before KING, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Mario Howard Lloyd, Appellant Pro Se. Christie Newman, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Mario Howard Lloyd appeals the district court’s order
accepting the report and recommendation of the magistrate judge,
granting summary judgment to Defendants, and dismissing his claims
filed under the Federal Tort Claims Act and Bivens v. Six Unknown
Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics,
403 U.S. 388 (1982). We
have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See
Lloyd v. United States, No. CA-02-3291-2-27-AJ (D.S.C. filed
Jan. 7, 2005 & entered Jan. 10, 2005). We dispense 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
- 3 -