BANKS v. TRUMP US (2018)

Frederick Banks challenges the district court's order dismissing—under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (2012)—what it construed to be an action under Bivens v. Six Unknown Fed. Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971). The district court also recognized that to the extent Banks sought release from custody pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012), Banks failed to exhaust his available remedies. Banks challenges on appeal only the district court's exhaustion holding, see 4th Cir. R. 34(b), which we conclude is correct. Accordingly, we grant Banks’ application to proceed in forma pauperis and affirm. See Banks v. Trump, No. 5:17-ct-03060-BO (E.D.N.C. Sept. 27, 2017). We 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

PER CURIAM:

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.