Williams v. Ingram

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-7982
GEORGE EDWARD WILLIAMS, JR.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
J. R. INGRAM, Special Agent; RON ROGERS,
Special Agent; UNKNOWN OFFICERS AND AGENTS,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. James A. Beaty, Jr.,
District Judge. (CA-94-270-2)
Submitted: March 21, 1996 Decided: April 12, 1996
Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
George Edward Williams, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Lindsay Reeves
Davis, Jr., Charles Edward Nichols, NICHOLS, CAFFREY, HILL, EVANS
& MURRELLE, Greensboro, North Carolina; Gill Paul Beck, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying
relief on his complaint filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1983) and
Bivens.* We have reviewed the record and the district court's opin-
ion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find
no reversible error. Accordingly, although we grant leave to pro-
ceed in forma pauperis, we affirm on the reasoning of the district
court. Williams v. Ingram, No. CA-94-270-2 (M.D.N.C. Oct. 11,
1995). 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 the Fed. Bureau of
Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971).
2