Filed: Jan. 23, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-7310 ABDUL-AZIZ RASHID MUHAMMAD, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:11-ct-03126-FL) Submitted: January 21, 2014 Decided: January 23, 2014 Before MOTZ, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Abdul-Aziz Rashi
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-7310 ABDUL-AZIZ RASHID MUHAMMAD, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:11-ct-03126-FL) Submitted: January 21, 2014 Decided: January 23, 2014 Before MOTZ, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Abdul-Aziz Rashid..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-7310
ABDUL-AZIZ RASHID MUHAMMAD,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan,
District Judge. (5:11-ct-03126-FL)
Submitted: January 21, 2014 Decided: January 23, 2014
Before MOTZ, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Abdul-Aziz Rashid Muhammad, Appellant Pro Se. Christina Ann
Kelley, BUREAU OF PRISONS, Butner, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Abdul-Aziz Rashid Muhammad appeals the district
court’s order denying reconsideration of the district court’s
previous order dismissing his complaint brought pursuant to the
Federal Tort Claims Act. We have reviewed the record and find
no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons
stated by the district court. Muhammad v. United States, No.
5:11-ct-03126-FL (E.D.N.C. Aug. 1, 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
*
To the extent Muhammad seeks to appeal the underlying
order dismissing his complaint, his appeal is timely only as to
the denial of his motion for reconsideration, which is properly
construed as a motion pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). See
Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(4)(A); see generally Dove v. CODESCO,
569
F.2d 807, 809 (4th Cir. 1978).
2