Case Name: Sherrod V. BRIGHT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE DRUG ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATION; Florence County Sheriffs' Department, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-03-16
Citations: 318 F. App'x 243
Docket Number: No. 08-2146
Parties: Sherrod V. BRIGHT, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE DRUG ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATION; Florence County Sheriffs’ Department, Defendants—Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 318
Pages: 243–244

Head Matter:
Sherrod V. BRIGHT, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE DRUG ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATION; Florence County Sheriffs’ Department, Defendants—Appellees.
No. 08-2146.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: March 12, 2009.
Decided: March 16, 2009.
Sherrod V. Bright, Appellant Pro Se.. Beth Drake, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina; James C. Rushton, III, Hyman Law Firm, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Before MOTZ and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Sherrod V. Bright appeals the district court's order 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, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Bright's motion to consolidate and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Bright v. U.S. Dep't of Justice Drug Enforcement Admin., No. 4:07-cv-03002-TLW, 2008 WL 4335535 (D.S.C. Sept. 16, 2008). 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.