The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
14-7528•Daniel H. King v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General; CHARLES E. SAMUELS, JR.; CHARLES RATLEDGE
14-7528Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitMar 2, 2015
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-7528
DANIEL H. KING,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General; CHARLES E. SAMUELS,
JR.; CHARLES RATLEDGE,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan,
District Judge. (5:14-ct-03062-FL)
Submitted: February 25, 2015 Decided: March 2, 2015
Before NIEMEYER, KING, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Daniel H. King, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Daniel H. King appeals the district court’s order
dismissing under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012) 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. King v. Holder, No.
5:14-ct-03062-FL (E.D.N.C. Oct. 7, 2014). 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
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.