Bradley R. Marshall v. Stephen L. Purcell

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-1045
BRADLEY R. MARSHALL,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
STEPHEN L. PURCELL; JENNIFER GEE; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT
OF LABOR; JOHN DOE(S); JANE DOE 1; JANE DOE 2; JANE DOE 3;
JANE DOE 4; JANE DOE 5,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Charleston. Richard Mark Gergel, District
Judge. (2:12-cv-00084-RMG)
Submitted: May 23, 2013 Decided: May 28, 2013
Before MOTZ and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Bradley R. Marshall, Appellant Pro Se. Lee Berlinsky, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charleston, South Carolina, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Bradley R. Marshall appeals the district court’s
orders accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge as
modified and dismissing Marshall’s action under the
Administrative Procedures Act 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. Marshall v. Purcell, No. 2:12-cv-00084-
RMG (D.S.C. Dec. 11, 2012; Jan. 2, 2013). 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

-- 2 of 2 --