From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Corrigan v. Tucker

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Apr 26, 2013
519 F. App'x 195 (4th Cir. 2013)

Opinion

No. 12-7967

04-26-2013

MARK CORRIGAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DANNY TUCKER, Case Manager FCC Petersburg Camp, Virginia; PATRICIA R. STANSBERRY, Warden FCI Petersburg, Virginia, Defendants - Appellees.

Mark Corrigan, Appellant Pro Se. Kent Pendleton Porter, Assistant United States Attorney, Daniel Patrick Shean, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellees.


UNPUBLISHED

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (2:11-cv-00178-RAJ-TEM) Before DAVIS, KEENAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Mark Corrigan, Appellant Pro Se. Kent Pendleton Porter, Assistant United States Attorney, Daniel Patrick Shean, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Mark Corrigan appeals the district court's order denying relief on his complaint filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Corrigan v. Tucker, No. 2:11-cv-00178-RAJ-TEM (E.D. Va. Sept. 11, 2012). We 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


Summaries of

Corrigan v. Tucker

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Apr 26, 2013
519 F. App'x 195 (4th Cir. 2013)
Case details for

Corrigan v. Tucker

Case Details

Full title:MARK CORRIGAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DANNY TUCKER, Case Manager FCC…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Apr 26, 2013

Citations

519 F. App'x 195 (4th Cir. 2013)