Bennie Mack, Jr. v. D. Drew ( 2013 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 13-6026
    BENNIE AUSTIN MACK, JR.,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    D. DREW, in her individual capacity and in her official
    capacity as Warden for the Federal Correctional Institute at
    Bennettsville   South   Carolina;   P.    JENKINSON,  in her
    individual capacity and in her official capacity as case
    Manager   at   FCI    Bennettsville    South   Carolina; MS.
    STONEBREAKER, in her individual capacity as Camp Counselor
    at FCI Bennettsville South Carolina; R. E. HOLT, in his
    individual capacity and in his official capacity as Regional
    Director for the Federal Bureau of Prisons; YVONNE HINKSON,
    in her individual capacity and in her official capacity as
    Director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons,
    Defendants - Appellees.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Beaufort. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District
    Judge. (9:09-cv-02891-JFA)
    Submitted:   April 26, 2013                    Decided:   May 3, 2013
    Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Bennie Austin Mack, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Marshall Prince, II,
    Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for
    Appellees.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    2
    PER CURIAM:
    Bennie Austin Mack, Jr. appeals the district court’s
    order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(3) motion for relief
    from   the    district      court’s      judgment       dismissing     his    complaint
    filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed.
    Bureau   of    Narcotics,      
    403 U.S. 388
        (1971).        We    previously
    affirmed the district court’s orders dismissing the complaint
    and    denying     Mack’s    motions       for    reconsideration.            We    have
    reviewed     the   record    and   find    that        this   appeal   is    frivolous.
    Accordingly,       we   dismiss    the    appeal.         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.
    DISMISSED
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 13-6026

Filed Date: 5/3/2013

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021