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)
09-6536•Michael Brunell Flanigan v. United States of America
09-6536Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitSep 2, 2009
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-6536
MICHAEL BRUNELL FLANIGAN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; HARLEY LAPPIN; OFFICER SMITH;
LIEUTENANT BROE; BOP; LIEUTENANT NEGRON; A. JOSEPH; D.
TOWNES; R.E. HOLT; T. THOMAS; VANESSA ADAMS; KAREN WHITE;
HARRELL WATTS; DR. B. RICE,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Mark S. Davis, District
Judge. (2:08-cv-00446-MSD-TEM)
Submitted: August 26, 2009 Decided: September 2, 2009
Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and GREGORY and SHEDD, Circuit
Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael Brunell Flanigan, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Michael Brunell Flanigan 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), without prejudice for failure to comply with a court
order. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the
district court. See Flanigan v. United States, No. 2:08-cv-
00446-MSD-TEM (E.D. Va. filed Mar. 6, 2009 & entered Mar. 9,
2009). 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.