Case Name: JameS A. BUTLER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. V. JOHNSON; T.S. Miller; R. Cosgrove; L. Long; K. Cox; K.H. Hawks; J.E. Gunja, Warden, Respondents-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-03-06
Citations: 56 F. App'x 613
Docket Number: No. 02-7235
Parties: JameS A. BUTLER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. V. JOHNSON; T.S. Miller; R. Cosgrove; L. Long; K. Cox; K.H. Hawks; J.E. Gunja, Warden, Respondents-Appel-lees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 56
Pages: 613–613

Head Matter:
JameS A. BUTLER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. V. JOHNSON; T.S. Miller; R. Cosgrove; L. Long; K. Cox; K.H. Hawks; J.E. Gunja, Warden, Respondents-Appel-lees.
No. 02-7235.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Jan. 31, 2003.
Decided March 6, 2003.
James A. Butler, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Michael DiBiagio, United States Attorney, Nadira Clark, Special Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
Before WILKINS, Chief Judge, MICHAEL, Circuit Judge, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
James A. Butler appeals the district court's order denying relief on his complaint filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the Federal 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 on the reasoning of the district court. See Butler v. Johnson, No. CA-01-2345-WMN (D.Md. June 10, 2002). 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.