Filed: Aug. 28, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7936 DONNIE SPELLER MOORE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus TIMOTHY M. SMITH, Garage Foreman, Individually and in Official Capacities; J. HOWARD LOSIEWICZ, Discipline Hearing Officer, Individually and in Official Capacities; RICH SHOOK, Health Service Administrator, Individually and in Official Capacities, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Freder
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7936 DONNIE SPELLER MOORE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus TIMOTHY M. SMITH, Garage Foreman, Individually and in Official Capacities; J. HOWARD LOSIEWICZ, Discipline Hearing Officer, Individually and in Official Capacities; RICH SHOOK, Health Service Administrator, Individually and in Official Capacities, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederi..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-7936
DONNIE SPELLER MOORE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
TIMOTHY M. SMITH, Garage Foreman, Individually
and in Official Capacities; J. HOWARD
LOSIEWICZ, Discipline Hearing Officer,
Individually and in Official Capacities; RICH
SHOOK, Health Service Administrator,
Individually and in Official Capacities,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, District Judge. (1:06-
cv-00911-JFM)
Submitted: August 23, 2007 Decided: August 28, 2007
Before WILLIAMS, Chief Judge, and WILKINS and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Donnie Speller Moore, Appellant Pro Se. Ariana Wright Arnold,
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Donnie Speller Moore appeals the district court’s order
denying relief on his Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed.
Bureau of Narcotics,
403 U.S. 388 (1971) action. We have reviewed
the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on
the reasoning of the district court. See Moore v. Smith, 1:06-cv-
00911-JFM (D. Md. Oct. 31, 2006). 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 in the
decisional process.
AFFIRMED
- 2 -