Lane v. Federal Bureau of Prisons

442 F. App'x 578
CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
DecidedDecember 19, 2011
DocketNo. 11-5175
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 442 F. App'x 578 (Lane v. Federal Bureau of Prisons) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Lane v. Federal Bureau of Prisons, 442 F. App'x 578 (D.C. Cir. 2011).

Opinion

JUDGMENT

PER CURIAM.

This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the brief filed by the appellant. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2); D.C.Cir. Rule 34(j). It is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s order filed July 8, 2011, 2011 WL 2669203, be affirmed. The Bureau of Prisons has exempted its inmate records systems from the Privacy Act’s accuracy and amendment provisions. See Martinez v. Bureau of Prisons, 444 F.3d 620, 624 (D.C.Cir.2006) (per curiam); White v. United States Probation Office, 148 F.3d 1124, 1125 (D.C.Cir.1998) (per curiam).

[579]*579Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk is directed to -withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. See Fed. R.App. P. 41(b); D.C.Cir. Rule 41.

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

Related

Greer v. United States
District of Columbia, 2021
Patton v. United States
District of Columbia, 2016
Donelson v. U.S. Bureau of Prisons
82 F. Supp. 3d 367 (District of Columbia, 2015)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
442 F. App'x 578, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lane-v-federal-bureau-of-prisons-cadc-2011.