Case Name: Denzil T. MOORE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; Richard Ramirez, Regional Medical Director; Elizabeth Masteller; Dr. Ellen Mace; Janet Bunts; Mark Dib, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-09-15
Citations: 332 F. App'x 75
Docket Number: No. 09-6543
Parties: Denzil T. MOORE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; Richard Ramirez, Regional Medical Director; Elizabeth Masteller; Dr. Ellen Mace; Janet Bunts; Mark Dib, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before MICHAEL and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 332
Pages: 75–75

Head Matter:
Denzil T. MOORE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; Richard Ramirez, Regional Medical Director; Elizabeth Masteller; Dr. Ellen Mace; Janet Bunts; Mark Dib, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 09-6543.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Aug. 31, 2009.
Decided: Sept. 15, 2009.
Denzil T. Moore, Appellant Pro Se. Helen Campbell Altmeyer, Assistant United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Before MICHAEL and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Denzil T. Moore appeals the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his complaint filed pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b), 2671-2680 (2006), 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, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Moore v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, No. 2:06-cv-00071-REM-JES (N.D.W.Va. Feb. 4, 2009). 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.