Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-15-07368/USCOURTS-ca4-15-07368-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 

---

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-7368

PAUL B. GOIST, a/k/a Paul Benjamin Goist,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

CHARLES SAMUELS, Director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons, 

in his official and individual capacity; REAR ADMIRAL NEWTON 

R. KENDIG, M.D., In his Official and Individual Capacity; 

HARRELL WATTS, In his Official and Individual Capacity; SOUTH 

EAST REGIONAL DIRECTOR, SERO; JOHN AND JANE DOES, Statutory 

Agent Officer, In their Official and Individual Capacity; 

WARDEN CRUZ, FCI Williamsburg, In her Official and Individual 

Capacity; ESTATE OF VICTOR LORANTH; WILLIAM RIGNEY, PA/MD, 

In his Official and Individual Capacity,

Defendants – Appellees,

and 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Beaufort. Richard Mark Gergel, District Judge. 

(9:14-cv-04036-RMG)

Submitted: April 21, 2016 Decided: April 25, 2016

Before WILKINSON, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Appeal: 15-7368 Doc: 32 Filed: 04/25/2016 Pg: 1 of 3
2

Paul Benjamin Goist, Appellant Pro Se. Barbara Murcier Bowens, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for 

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-7368 Doc: 32 Filed: 04/25/2016 Pg: 2 of 3
3

PER CURIAM:

Paul B. Goist appeals the district court’s orders accepting 

the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on 

his complaint filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents 

of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), and denying his 

motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find 

no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated 

by the district court. Goist v. Samuels, No. 9:14-cv-04036-RMG 

(D.S.C. July 22, 2015 & Aug. 25, 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

Appeal: 15-7368 Doc: 32 Filed: 04/25/2016 Pg: 3 of 3