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)
08-6126•Phillip Mark Shafer v. KEVIN BRANDT, Superintendent
08-6126Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitSep 18, 2008
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-6126
PHILLIP MARK SHAFER,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
KEVIN BRANDT, Superintendent; JAMES PERRY, Historic Program
Director; DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Secretary; WILL REYNOLDS, U.S. Park
Police,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, District Judge. (8:07-
cv-00219-PJM)
Submitted: September 16, 2008 Decided: September 18, 2008
Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Phillip Mark Shafer, Appellant Pro Se. Alex Samuel Gordon, OFFICE
OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Phillip Mark Shafer appeals the district court’s orders
denying relief on his complaint filed pursuant 42 U.S.C. §§ 1985,
1986 (2000), and Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau
of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), and denying his motion for
reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by
the district court. Shafer v. Brandt, No. 8:07-cv-00219-PJM (D.
Md. Dec. 20, 2007 & Mar. 5, 2008). We deny Shafer’s pending
motions for appointment of counsel and for 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.