Gamble v. Craddock
This text of 558 F. App'x 331 (Gamble v. Craddock) 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.
Opinion
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Eddie Gamble, Sr., appeals the district court’s orders dismissing without prejudice his complaint filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971), and denying his motions for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Gamble v. Craddock, No. 5:11-ct-03176-FL, 2013 WL 6244684 (E.D.N.C. May 28, 2013 & Aug. 21, 2013). We deny as moot Gamble’s motion to expedite and 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.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
558 F. App'x 331, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gamble-v-craddock-ca4-2014.