Akins v. United States

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedOctober 2, 2006
Docket06-6979
StatusUnpublished

This text of Akins v. United States (Akins v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Akins v. United States, (4th Cir. 2006).

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-6979

JERNARD AKINS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE; FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; HARRY G. LAPPIN, Director; ASSOCIATE WARDEN OF EVANS CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION; TYRONE ALLEN, Associate Warden; ROBERT MCLAFFERTY, Special Agent; STEVEN PRICE, Officer,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge. (3:04-cv-23200-MBS)

Submitted: September 26, 2006 Decided: October 2, 2006

Before WIDENER and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jernard Akins, Appellant Pro Se. Barbara Murcier Bowens, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

- 2 - PER CURIAM:

Jernard Akins appeals the district court’s order

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing

his complaint filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents

of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), without

prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Akins

also appeals the district court’s order denying his subsequent Fed.

R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion. We have reviewed the record and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s

orders. See Akins v. United States, 3:04-cv-23200-MBS (D.S.C.

filed Mar. 22, 2006 & entered Mar. 23, 2006; filed May 1, 2006 &

entered May 2, 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 the

decisional process.

AFFIRMED

- 3 -

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Akins v. United States, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/akins-v-united-states-ca4-2006.