Filed: Dec. 20, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-2154 ANDREW CHIEN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. LIAM O’GRADY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Anthony John Trenga, District Judge. (1:18-cv-00306-AJT-MSN) Submitted: December 18, 2018 Decided: December 20, 2018 Before AGEE, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Andrew Chien, Appellant Pro Se. Unpub
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-2154 ANDREW CHIEN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. LIAM O’GRADY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Anthony John Trenga, District Judge. (1:18-cv-00306-AJT-MSN) Submitted: December 18, 2018 Decided: December 20, 2018 Before AGEE, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Andrew Chien, Appellant Pro Se. Unpubl..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 18-2154
ANDREW CHIEN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
LIAM O’GRADY,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Alexandria. Anthony John Trenga, District Judge. (1:18-cv-00306-AJT-MSN)
Submitted: December 18, 2018 Decided: December 20, 2018
Before AGEE, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Andrew Chien, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Andrew Chien appeals the district court’s orders denying relief on his complaint
filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics,
403
U.S. 388 (1971), and denying reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.
Chien v. O’Grady, No. 1:18-cv-00306-AJT-MSN (E.D. Va. July 9 & Aug. 20, 2018).
We also deny Chien’s motions to assign counsel. 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
2