Bell v. Brooks ( 2005 )

PER CURIAM:

Mark Anthony Bell appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his Bivens ^* complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Bell v. Brooks, No. CA-03-938-1 (E.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

* 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).