Case Name: Charles A. URREGO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Office of the Attorney General of the United States, United States Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, United States Attorney for the Eastern District, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-06-20
Citations: 186 F. App'x 97
Docket Number: No. 05-3751-cv
Parties: Charles A. URREGO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Office of the Attorney General of the United States, United States Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, United States Attorney for the Eastern District, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: PRESENT: THOMAS J. MESKILL, JOSÉ A. CABRANES, RICHARD C. WESLEY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 186
Pages: 97–97

Head Matter:
Charles A. URREGO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Office of the Attorney General of the United States, United States Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, United States Attorney for the Eastern District, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 05-3751-cv.
United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
June 20, 2006.
Edward G. Bailey, Bailey & Sherman, P.C., Douglaston, New York, for Appellant.
Kevin P. Mulry, Assistant United States Attorney (Roslynn R. Mauskopf, United States Attorney, on the brief), United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York, Brooklyn, New York, for Appellee.
PRESENT: THOMAS J. MESKILL, JOSÉ A. CABRANES, RICHARD C. WESLEY, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
SUMMARY ORDER
Plaintiff-appellant Charles Urrego appeals from two Memoranda and Orders of the District Court, see Urrego v. United States, 00 Civ. 1203 (E.D.N.Y. March 31, 2003); Urrego v. United States, 00 Civ. 1203, 2005 WL 1263291 (E.D.N.Y. May 27, 2005), which dismissed his complaints seeking to recover damages under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2671 et seq., and Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971). Plaintiff alleged government misconduct arising out of his criminal prosecution and conviction for conspiracy to commit loansharking.
Upon reviewing the record, we conclude that plaintiffs claims on appeal are without merit. Accordingly, substantially for the reasons set forth in Judge Amon's careful and comprehensive decisions, we AFFIRM the judgment of the District Court.