The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
06-7130•Bernard Barnett v. United States of America
06-7130Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitNov 21, 2006
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-7130
BERNARD BARNETT,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior
District Judge. (7:06-cv-00336-JLK)
Submitted: November 15, 2006 Decided: November 21, 2006
Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Bernard Barnett, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Jack Bondurant, Jr.,
Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Bernard Barnett appeals the district court’s order
denying his motion for reconsideration under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)
in relation to the court’s denial of relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241.
We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. Barnett v. United States, No. 7:06-cv-00336-JLK (W.D. Va.
June 12, 2006). 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
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.