
    Dennis R. FLORES, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Alicia ALVAREZ, Agent of the U.S. Government; Byron Barker, Agent of the U.S. Government; Will Barker, Agent of the U.S. Government; David Day, Agent of the U.S. Government; Robert Dodge, Agent of the U.S. Government; Robert Dove, Agent of the U.S. Government; Jack Geren, Agent of the U.S. Government; Michael Gist, Agent of the U.S. Government; Susan Goldsmith, Agent of the U.S. Government; Thomas Hennessey, Agent of the U.S. Government; Barry Herrera, Agent of the U.S. Government; Darrell James, Agent of the U.S. Government; David Klimerk, Agent of the U.S. Government; Robert Kroger, Agent of the U.S. Government; Brent McMichael, Agent of the U.S. Government; Michael Morris, Agent of the U.S. Government; Jackie Northup, Agent of the U.S. Government; Ted Norvell, Agent of the U.S. Government; Kristi Ryan, Agent of the U.S. Government; Raymond Strucker, Agent of the U.S. Government; Rusty Taylor, Agent of the U.S. Government; Karen Thompson, Agent of the U.S. Government; Dennis Truckenbrod, Agent of the U.S. Government; Ronald Watson, Agent of the U.S. Government; Douglas Whitten, Agent of the U.S. Government, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 04-40544.
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Decided Nov. 4, 2004.
    Troy Alan Hornsby, Miller, James, Miller & Hornsby, Texarkana, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
    Steven M Mason, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Eastern District of Texas, Tyler, TX, for Defendants Appellee.
    Before REAVLEY, WIENER and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Despite the number on the building, the location of the office to be searched was adequately described in the warrant. Thus, the district court properly dismissed the case as the complaint failed to allege with particularity that the defendant’s conduct violated clearly established law. See Burns-Toole v. Byrne, 11 F.3d 1270, 1274 (5th Cir.1994).

AFFIRMED. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
     