Case Name: Charles LANGHAM, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America; Lt. R. Wright; Angela Dunbar; Officer Stoots; Officer Malone; Officer Boyd; Physician Assistant Scott; Mr. Duvall, Psychologist; Lieutenant Chase; Tina Scott; Rene Daubon, Defendants-Appellees, and Eric Holder, Attorney General, Defendant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-11-09
Citations: 670 F. App'x 168
Docket Number: No. 16-6252
Parties: Charles LANGHAM, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America; Lt. R. Wright; Angela Dunbar; Officer Stoots; Officer Malone; Officer Boyd; Physician Assistant Scott; Mr. Duvall, Psychologist; Lieutenant Chase; Tina Scott; Rene Daubon, Defendants-Appellees, and Eric Holder, Attorney General, Defendant.
Judges: Before TRAXLER and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 670
Pages: 168–169

Head Matter:
Charles LANGHAM, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America; Lt. R. Wright; Angela Dunbar; Officer Stoots; Officer Malone; Officer Boyd; Physician Assistant Scott; Mr. Duvall, Psychologist; Lieutenant Chase; Tina Scott; Rene Daubon, Defendants-Appellees, and Eric Holder, Attorney General, Defendant.
No. 16-6252
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: October 18, 2016
Decided: November 9, 2016
Charles Langham, Appellant Pro Se. Robert J. Dodson, Special Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Before TRAXLER and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Charles Langham appeals the district court's order granting summary judgment to Defendants and denying relief on his complaint raising claims pursuant to the Federal Torts Claim Act (FTCA), 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b), 2671-2680 (2012), and 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, although we grant Langham leave to proceed in forma pau-peris, we affirm the district court's order. Langham v. United States, No. 5:14—ct—03143-BO (E.D.N.C. filed Jan. 27, 2016 & entered Jan. 28, 2016). 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