UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-7755

DEE DEIDRE FARMER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus

MARGARET C. HAMBRICK, Regional Director; JOHN W. SHORE, Deputy Regional Director; ROGER TILDEN, Regional Hearing Administrator, Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CA- 95-3633-CCB)

Submitted: June 18, 1998 Decided: July 2, 1998

Before MURNAGHAN and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Dee Deidre Farmer, Appellant Pro Se. Allen F. Loucks, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Dee Deidre Farmer appeals from the district court's orders dismissing her Bivens1 civil rights complaint, and denying her motion for reconsideration filed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e).

Our review of the record discloses that this appeal is without merit. The sole issue raised in Farmer’s informal brief is that her placement in administrative segregation and subsequent commitment to controlled housing status in prison violated her due process rights. We find that the district court’s reliance on Sandin v. Conner2 in rejecting this claim is sound. In addition, because Farmer's motion for reconsideration does not demonstrate that her action was improperly dismissed, we find that the district court's denial of her Rule 59(e) motion was not an abuse of discretion.3 We deny Farmer’s motion for appointment of counsel, and affirm both district court orders. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the mate- rials before the Court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

See Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). 515 U.S. 472 (1995).

See United States v. Williams, 674 F.2d 310, 312 (4th Cir. 1982).