U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2014

Eddie Gamble, Sr. v. Vernessa Craddock

Eddie Gamble, Sr. v. Vernessa Craddock
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided March 5, 2014

Eddie Gamble, Sr. v. Vernessa Craddock

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-7735

EDDIE GAMBLE, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. VERNESSA CRADDOCK, Defendant – Appellee, and L. T. WRIGHT, Defendant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:11-ct-03176-FL)

Submitted: February 27, 2014 Decided: March 5, 2014

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Eddie Gamble, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Michael Lockridge, Special Assistant United States Attorney, Butner, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: Eddie Gamble, Sr., appeals the district court’s orders dismissing without prejudice his complaint filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), and denying his motions for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Gamble v. Craddock, No. 5:11-ct-03176-FL (E.D.N.C. May 28, 2013 & Aug. 21, 2013). We deny as moot Gamble’s motion to expedite and 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

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.