Case: 22-30575 Document: 00516732768 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/01/2023

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 22-30575 Summary Calendar FILED ____________ May 1, 2023 Lyle W. Cayce William R. Abbott, Clerk Plaintiff—Appellant, versus United States Bureau of Prisons; Sekou Ma’at; Oscar Mack; D. Stout; Shelia Lyons, Defendants—Appellees. ______________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 2:21-CV-3890 ______________________________ Before Wiener, Elrod, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam: * William R. Abbott, federal prisoner # 57819-083, appeals the dismissal as frivolous and for failure to state a claim of his complaint alleging that unconstitutional administrative procedures at the Federal Correctional Center Oakdale led to the denial of requests for compassionate release based on the COVID-19 pandemic. Construing Abbott’s complaint as asserting _____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

Case: 22-30575 Document: 00516732768 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/01/2023

No. 22-30575

claims under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), the district court concluded that dismissal was appropriate because there was no such cause of action under Bivens.

Abbott has not briefed any challenge to the district court’s dismissal of his Bivens claims or the denial of his postjudgment motion; accordingly, he has waived review of those rulings. See Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224- (5th Cir. 1993). Rather, he contends that the district court erred in construing his complaint as arising under Bivens, where the basis for jurisdiction was 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and the governing law was the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). We review the dismissal of a complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) as both frivolous and for failure to state a claim de novo. Green v. Atkinson, 623 F.3d 278, 280 (5th Cir. 2010).

After careful consideration of the record, we discern no error in the district court’s dismissal of Abbott’s complaint, whether his claims are construed under Bivens or the APA. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. Abbott’s motion for appointment of counsel on appeal is DENIED. See Ulmer v. Chancellor, 691 F.2d 209, 212-13 (5th Cir. 1982).