Court Opinion

ID: 9556615
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-17 21:01:30.179767+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:01:13.485857
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6191      Doc: 17         Filed: 08/16/2023     Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 23-6191

        GREGORY A. WATERS,

                             Plaintiff - Appellant,

                     v.

        MRS. S. BROWN, Warden; J. MCCALLOUM, Correctional Officer; S. SENKO,
        Correctional Officer/Paramedic; VISITING ROOM OFFICER ON JANUARY 4,
        2023, 12-12:30 PM,

                             Defendants - Appellees.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at
        Wheeling. John Preston Bailey, District Judge. (5:23-cv-00019-JPB-JPM)

        Submitted: August 10, 2023                                        Decided: August 16, 2023

        Before GREGORY and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit
        Judge.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Gregory A. Waters, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-6191      Doc: 17        Filed: 08/16/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

              Gregory A. Waters appeals the district court’s order dismissing his complaint filed

        pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S.

        388 (1971). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. See Mays v. Smith,

        70 F.4th 198, 201-02 (4th Cir. 2023) (stated standard of review). Accordingly, we affirm

        the district court’s order.   Waters v. Brown, 5:23-cv-00019-JPB-JPM (N.D.W. Va.

        Feb. 21, 2023). We deny Waters’ motion for a transfer to a different facility. 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

                                                    2