Case Name: Jack N. LUCK; Jennie D. Luck; William C. Luck, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. UNITED STATES of America; Donald A. David; Thomas P. Gourley; Thomas A. Slate; Ann Veneman, Secretary of United States Department of Agriculture, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2002-03-15
Citations: 30 F. App'x 269
Docket Number: No. 01-2501
Parties: Jack N. LUCK; Jennie D. Luck; William C. Luck, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. UNITED STATES of America; Donald A. David; Thomas P. Gourley; Thomas A. Slate; Ann Veneman, Secretary of United States Department of Agriculture, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before WILKINS, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 30
Pages: 269–269

Head Matter:
Jack N. LUCK; Jennie D. Luck; William C. Luck, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. UNITED STATES of America; Donald A. David; Thomas P. Gourley; Thomas A. Slate; Ann Veneman, Secretary of United States Department of Agriculture, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 01-2501.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Feb. 27, 2002.
Decided March 15, 2002.
Jack N. Luck, Jennie D. Luck, William C. Luck, Appellants Pro Se. Julie C. Dudley, Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellees.
Before WILKINS, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Jack N. Luck, Jennie D. Luck, and William C. Luck appeal the district court's order granting the Defendants' motion to dismiss their action filed pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), 28 U.S.C.A. § 1346 (West 1994 & Supp. 2001), and Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and final order and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Luck v. United States, No. CA-01-16-6 (W.D.Va. Oct. 24, 2001). 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.