Filed: Jul. 12, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 26, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-6176 DAVID EUGENE BRINKLEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; ROSCOE RAMSEY, Doctor; DOCTOR CARLOS DUCHESNE; P. A. GONZALEZ; WARDEN TOMMY JOHNS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:10-ct-03084-BO) Submitted: June 26, 2012 Decided: July 12, 2012 Before KEENAN and DIAZ, Circuit J
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-6176 DAVID EUGENE BRINKLEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; ROSCOE RAMSEY, Doctor; DOCTOR CARLOS DUCHESNE; P. A. GONZALEZ; WARDEN TOMMY JOHNS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:10-ct-03084-BO) Submitted: June 26, 2012 Decided: July 12, 2012 Before KEENAN and DIAZ, Circuit Ju..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-6176
DAVID EUGENE BRINKLEY,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; ROSCOE RAMSEY, Doctor; DOCTOR
CARLOS DUCHESNE; P. A. GONZALEZ; WARDEN TOMMY JOHNS,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle,
District Judge. (5:10-ct-03084-BO)
Submitted: June 26, 2012 Decided: July 12, 2012
Before KEENAN and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
David Eugene Brinkley, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
David Eugene Brinkley appeals the district court’s
order dismissing under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2006) this
action filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of
Fed. Bureau of Narcotics,
403 U.S. 388 (1971), and the Federal
Tort Claims Act. We have reviewed the record and find that this
appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for the
reasons stated by the district court. Brinkley v. United
States, No. 5:10-ct-03084-BO (E.D.N.C. Mar. 11, 2011 & Jan. 10,
2012). 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.
DISMISSED
2