Filed: Jun. 21, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6776 CURTIS E. CRAWFORD, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; JOSEPH M. BROOKS, Warden, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, District Judge. (CA-04-218-2) Submitted: June 10, 2004 Decided: June 21, 2004 Before WILLIAMS and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublis
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6776 CURTIS E. CRAWFORD, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; JOSEPH M. BROOKS, Warden, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, District Judge. (CA-04-218-2) Submitted: June 10, 2004 Decided: June 21, 2004 Before WILLIAMS and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublish..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6776 CURTIS E. CRAWFORD, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; JOSEPH M. BROOKS, Warden, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, District Judge. (CA-04-218-2) Submitted: June 10, 2004 Decided: June 21, 2004 Before WILLIAMS and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Curtis E. Crawford, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Curtis E. Crawford appeals the district court’s orders dismissing his complaint filed under the Federal Torts Claim Act pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) (2000), for failure to state a claim and dismissing his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Crawford v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, No. CA-04-218-2 (E.D. Va. Apr. 26, 2004; Apr. 30, 2004). 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 -
