Noesi v. Bledsoe

Fourth Circuit

Noesi v. Bledsoe

156 F. App'x 609

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided December 5, 2005·No. No. 05-6793·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Jose Francisco Noesi appeals the district court’s order dismissing his Bivens v. Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971) complaint as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Noesi v. Bledsoe, No. CA-05-141-7-SGW (W.D.Va. Mar. 14, 2005). 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

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

PER CURIAM:

Jose Francisco Noesi appeals the district court’s order dismissing his Bivens v. Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971) complaint as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Noesi v. Bledsoe, No. CA-05-141-7-SGW (W.D.Va. Mar. 14, 2005). 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

Noesi v. Bledsoe, 156 F. App'x 609 (4th Cir. 2005).

Pincite

156 F. App'x 609 (Noesi v. Bledsoe) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related