Filed: Aug. 20, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6911 SYLVIA RYAN WEBSTER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus VANESSA ADAMS, Alderson Prison Camp, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Bluefield. David A. Faber, Chief District Judge. (CA-03-690-1) Submitted: August 12, 2004 Decided: August 20, 2004 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Sylvi
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6911 SYLVIA RYAN WEBSTER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus VANESSA ADAMS, Alderson Prison Camp, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Bluefield. David A. Faber, Chief District Judge. (CA-03-690-1) Submitted: August 12, 2004 Decided: August 20, 2004 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Sylvia..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-6911
SYLVIA RYAN WEBSTER,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
VANESSA ADAMS, Alderson Prison Camp,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern
District of West Virginia, at Bluefield. David A. Faber, Chief
District Judge. (CA-03-690-1)
Submitted: August 12, 2004 Decided: August 20, 2004
Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Sylvia Ryan Webster, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Sylvia Ryan Webster appeals the district court’s order
accepting the report and recommendation of the magistrate judge and
dismissing her complaint filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000), and
also considered under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the
Fed. Bureau of Narcotics,
403 U.S. 388 (1971). We have reviewed
the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm
for the reasons stated by the district court. See Webster v.
Adams, No. CA-03-690-1 (S.D.W. Va. filed May 13, 2004 & entered
May 14, 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 -