Filed: Dec. 22, 2010
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-1412 CHRISTOPHER EUBANKS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; UNITED STATES PROBATION OFFICE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Elkins. Robert E. Maxwell, Senior District Judge. (2:09-cv-00126-REM-DJJ) Submitted: December 16, 2010 Decided: December 22, 2010 Before GREGORY, DUNCAN, and DAVIS, Circuit J
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-1412 CHRISTOPHER EUBANKS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; UNITED STATES PROBATION OFFICE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Elkins. Robert E. Maxwell, Senior District Judge. (2:09-cv-00126-REM-DJJ) Submitted: December 16, 2010 Decided: December 22, 2010 Before GREGORY, DUNCAN, and DAVIS, Circuit Ju..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-1412
CHRISTOPHER EUBANKS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; UNITED
STATES PROBATION OFFICE,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Elkins. Robert E. Maxwell, Senior
District Judge. (2:09-cv-00126-REM-DJJ)
Submitted: December 16, 2010 Decided: December 22, 2010
Before GREGORY, DUNCAN, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Christopher Eubanks, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Christopher Eubanks appeals the district court’s order
accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
dismissing under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2006) his 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. Eubanks v. United States,
No. 2:09-cv-00126-REM-DJJ (N.D. W. Va. Mar. 22, 2010). 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