Corey Hood v. Bureau of Prisons
Corey Hood v. Bureau of Prisons
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 21-6985
COREY DEANDRE HOOD,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
BUREAU OF PRISONS; BELLAMY, Lieutenant; WHITE, R&D Officer; WRIGHT, Correction Officer; OWENS, Correction Officer; MULLINS, Correction Officer; SLONE/SLOAN, Correction Officer; PARSONS, Lieutenant; LAFAVE, Lieutenant; LIVELY, Lieutenant; HANGER, Associate Warden; LIEU, Associate Warden; BRECKON, Warden; JANE DOE, Chief Psychologist; PARKER, Nurse; CAUDILL, Nurse; BROWN, Disciplinary Hearing Officer; WHITE, SHU Officer; JANE DOE, Nurse; HOLBROOK, Correction Officer; JOHN DOE, Nurse; MITCHELL, Correction Officer,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Michael F. Urbanski, Chief District Judge. (7:20-cv-00402-MFU-JCH)
Submitted: October 29, 2021 Decided: November 22, 2021
Before NIEMEYER, AGEE, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion. Corey DeAndre Hood, Appellant Pro Se. Sara Bugbee Winn, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2 PER CURIAM:
Corey DeAndre Hood appeals the district court’s order dismissing his case without
prejudice for failing to inform the court of his address of record. After noting his appeal,
Hood timely filed a motion to reconsider the district court’s order, which remains pending
in the district court. The district court subsequently filed a notice indicating its inclination
to grant Hood’s motion. Consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 12.1(b) and Fobian v. Storage
Tech. Corp.,
164 F.3d 887, 890-91 (4th Cir. 1999), we remand for the limited purpose of
allowing the district court to consider Hood’s pending motion for reconsideration. After
the district court has made its ruling, the record, as supplemented, will then be returned to
this court for further consideration. In ordering this remand, we express no opinion as to
the merits of Hood’s motion.
REMANDED
3
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished