Crawford v. Gard

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-7990 CURTIS E. CRAWFORD, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus ROBERT E. GARD, Supervisor, Deputy United States Marshal, Defendant - Appellee. No. 95-7991 CURTIS E. CRAWFORD, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus J. GARFIELD DILLARD, Chairman, in his personal and professional capacity; LEWIS P. BARLOW, Superintendent, in his personal and profes- sional capacity; MAJOR SPIKER, in his personal and professional capacity; LIEUTENANT WRIGHT, in his personal and professional capacity; OTHERS UNKNOWN, in their personal and profes- sional capacities, Defendants - Appellees. No. 95-7992 CURTIS E. CRAWFORD, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JOHN MARSHALL, Deputy, United States Marshal, Defendant - Appellee. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca B. Smith, District Judge. (CA-95-641-2, CA-95-747-2, CA-95-756-2) Submitted: April 15, 1996 Decided: May 2, 1996 Before ERVIN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Curtis E. Crawford, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). 2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's orders dismissing his Bivens* complaints. The district court assessed filing fees in accordance with Evans v. Croom, 650 F.2d 521 (4th Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1153 (1982), and dismissed the cases without prej- udice when Appellant failed to comply with the fee orders. Finding no abuse of discretion, we affirm the district court's orders. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED * Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). 3