Case ID: f-appx_669/html/0675-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Gregory C. KRUG, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Victor LORANTH, in his individual capacity, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 15-6789
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: October 17, 2016
    Decided: October 20, 2016
    Gregory C. Krug, Appellant Pro Se. Marshall Prince, II, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
    Before SHEDD, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
   Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Gregory Charles Krug appeals the district court’s order accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and dismissing Krug’s complaint filed 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), for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Krug v. Loranth, No. 1:14-cv-01829-DCN (D.S.C. Jan. 6, 2015). 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 
      
      
         We remanded for the limited purpose of p'er-mitting the district court to determine whether Krug’s notice of appeal should be construed as a motion to reopen the appeal period, and if so, whether reopening was merited. On remand, the district court granted Krug’s motion to reopen.