Filed: May 05, 2009
Latest Update: Feb. 12, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-6218 BENNIE A. MACK, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. WILLIAM L. OSTEEN, JR., in his individual capacity and in his official capacity as Federal District Court Judge for the Middle District of North Carolina; KAREN L. NENSTEIL, in her individual capacity and in her official capacity as a former agent for the North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation; ROBERT M. HAMILTON, in his individual and in his official capacity as an
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-6218 BENNIE A. MACK, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. WILLIAM L. OSTEEN, JR., in his individual capacity and in his official capacity as Federal District Court Judge for the Middle District of North Carolina; KAREN L. NENSTEIL, in her individual capacity and in her official capacity as a former agent for the North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation; ROBERT M. HAMILTON, in his individual and in his official capacity as an A..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-6218
BENNIE A. MACK, JR.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
WILLIAM L. OSTEEN, JR., in his individual capacity and in
his official capacity as Federal District Court Judge for
the Middle District of North Carolina; KAREN L. NENSTEIL, in
her individual capacity and in her official capacity as a
former agent for the North Carolina State Bureau of
Investigation; ROBERT M. HAMILTON, in his individual and in
his official capacity as an Assistant United States
Attorney; JOSEPH M. WILSON, JR., in his individual capacity
and in his official capacity as a practicing attorney and
partner in the Law Firm of “Merritt Flebotte Wilson Webb &
Carusso PLLC; PAUL TREVOR SHARP, in his individual capacity
and in his official capacity as a Federal Magistrate Judge
for the Middle District of North Carolina; JUDGE WALLACE W.
DIXON, in his individual capacity and in his official
capacity as a Federal Magistrate Judge for the Middle
District of North Carolina; ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., in his
individual capacity and in his official capacity as United
States Attorney General; ANNA MILLS WAGONER, in her
individual capacity and in her official capacity as United
States Attorney for the Middle District of North Carolina;
FRANK J. CHUT, JR., in his individual capacity and in his
official capacity as Assistant United States Attorney for
the Middle District of North Carolina; ROBIN PENDERGRAFT, in
her individual capacity and in her official capacity as
Director of the North Carolina State Bureau of
Investigation; NC ATTORNEY GENERAL ROY COOPER, in his
individual capacity and in his official capacity as North
Carolina Attorney General; KEVIN SNEAD, in his individual
capacity and in his official capacity as an agent for the
North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. N. Carlton Tilley,
Jr., Senior District Judge. (1:08-cv-00776-NCT-RAE)
Submitted: April 23, 2009 Decided: May 5, 2009
Before MICHAEL, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Bennie A. Mack, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Anthony Paul Giorno,
Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, Gill Paul
Beck, Sr., Robert Michael Hamilton, Assistant United States
Attorneys, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
PER CURIAM:
Bennie A. Mack, Jr., appeals the district court’s
order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915A(b) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find that
this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal
for the reasons stated by the district court. Mack v. Osteen,
No. 1:08-cv-00776-NCT-RAE (M.D.N.C. Jan. 30, 2009). 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.
DISMISSED
3