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)
17-1578•Crescencio Perez-Perez v. M. E. RAY, Warden of FCI Estill, SC, as an individual
17-1578Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitAug 21, 2017
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 17-1578
CRESCENCIO PEREZ-PEREZ,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
M. E. RAY, Warden of FCI Estill, SC, as an individual and in his official capacity;
C. E. FLOYD, Warden of FCI Estill, SC, as an individual and in his official
capacity; E. RAIN WATER, A.H.S.A, as an individual and in her official capacity;
DR. JOSE HERNANDEZ, Medical Officer, as an individual and in his official
capacity; B. PARINA, M.D., as an individual and in his official capacity; DR.
ROSS RAMES, M.D., as an individual and in his official capacity; CAROLYN V.
RICKARDS, Regional Director, as an individual and in her official capacity;
WENDY J. ROAL, Administrator National Inmate Appeals, as an individual and in
her official capacity; FREDERICK GOULDING,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
Beaufort. Cameron McGowan Currie, Senior District Judge. (9:16-cv-03574-CMC)
Submitted: August 17, 2017 Decided: August 21, 2017
Before KEENAN, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
-- 1 of 3 --
2
Crescencio Perez-Perez, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 2 of 3 --
3
PER CURIAM:
Crescencio Perez-Perez appeals the district court’s order accepting the
recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on 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. Accordingly, we
affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Perez-Perez v. Ray, No. 9:16-cv-
03574-CMC (D.S.C. Mar. 27, 2017). 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
-- 3 of 3 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.