RICKIE EDWARD WILKINSON, Individually v. KENT HALLSTEN, Individually

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-1995
RICKIE EDWARD WILKINSON, Individually and
doing business as Rickie’s One Stop; DAWN
SWINK WILKINSON,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
versus
KENT HALLSTEN, Individually and in his
official capacity as agent, Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco and Firearms; JOHN GOLDER,
Individually and in his official capacity as
Supervisor, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and
Firearms; ROBERT FROMME, Individually and in
his official capacity as Deputy Sheriff of
Iredell County Sheriff’s Department; JOHN DOES
1-10, Individually and in their official
capacity as Agent of Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco and Firearms,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L. Voorhees,
District Judge. (5:06-cv-00002)
Submitted: April 18, 2007 Decided: May 3, 2007
Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

-- 1 of 3 --

- 2 -
Harold J. Bender, LAW OFFICE OF HAROLD J. BENDER, Charlotte, North
Carolina, for Appellants. Gretchen C. F. Shappert, United States
Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, Sidney P. Alexander, Assistant
United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 2 of 3 --

- 3 -
PER CURIAM:
Rickie Edward Wilkinson, individually and doing business
as Rickie’s One Stop, and Dawn Swink Wilkinson appeal the district
court’s order denying relief on their 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. See Wilkinson v. Hallsten, No. 5:06-cv-00002
(W.D.N.C. Aug. 2, 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

-- 3 of 3 --