Filed: Jul. 01, 2008
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6253 DAVID WILLIAM LINDER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. JEROME B. FRIEDMAN, Individually and in his official capacity, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (3:07-cv-00292-RLW) Submitted: June 26, 2008 Decided: July 1, 2008 Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirme
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6253 DAVID WILLIAM LINDER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. JEROME B. FRIEDMAN, Individually and in his official capacity, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (3:07-cv-00292-RLW) Submitted: June 26, 2008 Decided: July 1, 2008 Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-6253
DAVID WILLIAM LINDER,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
JEROME B. FRIEDMAN, Individually and in his official capacity,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior
District Judge. (3:07-cv-00292-RLW)
Submitted: June 26, 2008 Decided: July 1, 2008
Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit
Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
David William Linder, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
David William Linder appeals the district court’s order
adopting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing
Linder’s civil rights complaint, filed pursuant to 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. See Linder v. Friedman, No. 3:07-cv-00292-RLW (E.D. Va.
Jan. 7, 2008). 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
- 2 -