Case ID: f-appx_225/html/0127-01.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

Rickie Edward WILKINSON, Individually and doing business as Rickie’s One Stop; Dawn Swink Wilkinson, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Kent HALLSTEN, Individually and in his official capacity as agent, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms; John Golder, Individually and in his official capacity as Supervisor, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms; Robert Fromme, Individually and in his official capacity as Deputy Sheriff of Iredell County Sheriffs Department; John Does 1-10, Individually and in their official capacity as Agent of Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 06-1995.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: April 18, 2007.
    Decided: May 3, 2007.
    Harold J. Bender, Law Office of Harold J. Bender, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellants. Gretchen C.F. Shappert, United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, Sidney P. Alexander, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellees.
    Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
   PER CURIAM:

Rickie Edward Wilkinson, individually and doing business as Rickie’s One Stop, and Dawn Swink Wilkinson appeal the district court’s order denying relief on their 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). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Wilkinson v. Hallsten, No. 5:06-cv-00002, 2006 WL 2224293 (W.D.N.C. Aug. 2, 2006). 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.