Filed: Apr. 02, 2013
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-7771 MICHAEL F. SCHULZE, Plaintiff – Appellant, and GERARDO GONZALEZ, Plaintiff, v. DWIGHT C. RATLEY; SHANNON D. DAVIS; GERALD M. DEL RE; JAMES A. EDWARDS; PAMELA D. MAJOR; RAYMOND A. SIMMONS; DARLENE DREW; UNKNOWN OFFICERS, of the Federal Prisons; FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; J. COMSTOCK; ANDERSON, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Joseph F
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-7771 MICHAEL F. SCHULZE, Plaintiff – Appellant, and GERARDO GONZALEZ, Plaintiff, v. DWIGHT C. RATLEY; SHANNON D. DAVIS; GERALD M. DEL RE; JAMES A. EDWARDS; PAMELA D. MAJOR; RAYMOND A. SIMMONS; DARLENE DREW; UNKNOWN OFFICERS, of the Federal Prisons; FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; J. COMSTOCK; ANDERSON, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Joseph F...
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-7771
MICHAEL F. SCHULZE,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
and
GERARDO GONZALEZ,
Plaintiff,
v.
DWIGHT C. RATLEY; SHANNON D. DAVIS; GERALD M. DEL RE; JAMES
A. EDWARDS; PAMELA D. MAJOR; RAYMOND A. SIMMONS; DARLENE
DREW; UNKNOWN OFFICERS, of the Federal Prisons; FEDERAL
BUREAU OF PRISONS; J. COMSTOCK; ANDERSON,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Greenville. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr.,
District Judge. (6:11-cv-00941-JFA)
Submitted: March 19, 2013 Decided: April 2, 2013
Before DAVIS, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael F. Schulze, Appellant Pro Se. Marshall Prince, II,
Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
PER CURIAM:
Michael F. Schulze appeals the district court’s order
accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
granting Defendants’ motion for summary judgment in this action
filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed.
Bureau of Narcotics,
403 U.S. 388 (1971), and the court’s order
denying reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find
no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons
stated by the district court. Schulze v. Ratley, No. 6:11-cv-
00941-JFA (D.S.C. Sept. 11, 2012; Oct. 10, 2012). We dispense
with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
adequately presented in the materials before this court and
argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
3