Rembert v. Neal

Fourth Circuit

Rembert v. Neal

55 F. App'x 199

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided February 4, 2003·No. No. 02-1933·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Carlton W. Rembert appeals from the district court’s order dismissing his action brought 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 the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Rembert v. Neal, No. CA-02-264-2 (E.D.Va. July 23, 2002). 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.

Carlton W. Rembert appeals from the district court’s order dismissing his action brought 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 the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Rembert v. Neal, No. CA-02-264-2 (E.D.Va. July 23, 2002). 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.

Rembert v. Neal, 55 F. App'x 199 (4th Cir. 2003).

Pincite

55 F. App'x 199 (Rembert v. Neal) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related