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)
99-7632•Edward Thomas Illsley v. KATHLEEN HAWKS, Director, United States Bureau of Prisons
99-7632Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitFeb 4, 2000
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-7632
EDWARD THOMAS ILLSLEY,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
KATHLEEN HAWKS, Director, United States Bureau
of Prisons; STEPHEN DEWALT, Warden, Federal
Correctional Institution; VIRGINIA STATE
PAROLE BOARD, Director and Members,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
trict of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior Dis-
trict Judge. (CA-99-424)
Submitted: January 18, 2000 Decided: February 4, 2000
Before WILLIAMS, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Edward Thomas Illsley, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Edward Thomas Illsley appeals the district court’s order dis-
missing his action which it properly construed as filed under 42
U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1999) and Bivens v. Six Unknown Named
Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). We have
reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the
magistrate judge’s recommendation and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See
Illsley v. Hawks, No. CA-99-424 (E.D. Va. Nov. 15, 1999). 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.