Filed: Mar. 10, 2009
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-7271 TYRONE HURT, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES MARSHAL SERVICE; UNKNOWN AGENT; U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE D.C., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:08-cv-00624-LMB-TCB) Submitted: February 20, 2009 Decided: March 10, 2009 Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circ
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-7271 TYRONE HURT, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES MARSHAL SERVICE; UNKNOWN AGENT; U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE D.C., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:08-cv-00624-LMB-TCB) Submitted: February 20, 2009 Decided: March 10, 2009 Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circu..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-7271
TYRONE HURT,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES MARSHAL SERVICE; UNKNOWN AGENT; U.S. DISTRICT
COURT FOR THE D.C.,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema,
District Judge. (1:08-cv-00624-LMB-TCB)
Submitted: February 20, 2009 Decided: March 10, 2009
Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Tyrone Hurt, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Tyrone Hurt appeals the district court’s order denying
relief on his Bivens complaint. * We have reviewed the record and
find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the
reasons stated by the district court. Hurt v. United States
Marshal Serv., No. 1:08-cv-00624-LMB-TCB (E.D. Va. June 24,
2008). 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