Miles v. Glen

Fourth Circuit

Miles v. Glen

588 F. App'x 258

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedDecember 19, 2014

StatusPublished

This text of 588 F. App'x 258 (Miles v. Glen) 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

Miles v. Glen, 588 F. App'x 258 (4th Cir. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Kelvin J. Miles appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on 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). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. Miles v. Glen, No. 2:13-cv-01408-RBH (D.S.C. July 15, 2014). We deny the motions for default judgment and to refund fees paid to the district court 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

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Kelvin J. Miles appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on 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). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. Miles v. Glen, No. 2:13-cv-01408-RBH (D.S.C. July 15, 2014). We deny the motions for default judgment and to refund fees paid to the district court 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

588 F. App'x 258, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/miles-v-glen-ca4-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack