Filed: Dec. 16, 2013
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-7231 VERDELL EVANS, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS DIVISION, ATF, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. J. Michelle Childs, District Judge. (6:12-cv-00641-JMC) Submitted: December 5, 2013 Decided: December 16, 2013 Before KING, FLOYD, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Verdell Evans, Appe
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-7231 VERDELL EVANS, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS DIVISION, ATF, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. J. Michelle Childs, District Judge. (6:12-cv-00641-JMC) Submitted: December 5, 2013 Decided: December 16, 2013 Before KING, FLOYD, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Verdell Evans, Appel..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-7231 VERDELL EVANS, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS DIVISION, ATF, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. J. Michelle Childs, District Judge. (6:12-cv-00641-JMC) Submitted: December 5, 2013 Decided: December 16, 2013 Before KING, FLOYD, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Verdell Evans, Appellant Pro Se. Barbara Murcier Bowens, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Verdell Evans, Jr. appeals the district court’s orders accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge, granting summary judgment to the Defendant in Evans’s civil action, and denying reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Evans v. Legislative Affairs Div., No. 6:12-cv-00641-JMC (D.S.C. June 11, 2013; Feb. 26, 2013). 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
