Filed: Oct. 12, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6833 HERCULES PIERRE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTE, ESTILL; GARY FORD, Employee; G. MARCK; STEVEN J. GAL, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Matthew J. Perry, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-03-308-3-10BC) Submitted: September 22, 2004 Decided: October 12, 2004 Before GREGORY and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAM
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6833 HERCULES PIERRE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTE, ESTILL; GARY FORD, Employee; G. MARCK; STEVEN J. GAL, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Matthew J. Perry, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-03-308-3-10BC) Submitted: September 22, 2004 Decided: October 12, 2004 Before GREGORY and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMI..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-6833
HERCULES PIERRE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTE, ESTILL; GARY
FORD, Employee; G. MARCK; STEVEN J. GAL,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Columbia. Matthew J. Perry, Jr., Senior
District Judge. (CA-03-308-3-10BC)
Submitted: September 22, 2004 Decided: October 12, 2004
Before GREGORY and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Hercules Pierre, Appellant Pro Se. Barbara Murcier Bowens, OFFICE
OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Hercules Pierre appeals the district court’s order
accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying
relief on his Bivens* complaint. We have reviewed the record and
find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning
of the district court. See Pierre v. Federal Correctional Inst.,
No. CA-03-308-3-10BC (D.S.C. Mar. 31, 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
*
Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of
Narcotics,
403 U.S. 388 (1971)
- 2 -