Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-15-07284/USCOURTS-ca4-15-07284-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 

---

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-7284

ROGER DALE PERSINGER, JR.,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

NORTHERN REGIONAL JAIL AND CORRECTIONAL FACILITY; DALE 

GRIFFITH, Unit Manager (NCF), sued in individual capacity; 

JAMES RUBENSTEIN, Commissioner Division of Corrections, sued 

in individual capacity; SYNTHIA GARDNER, Central Office 

Grievance Review, sued in individual capacity; DIANA MILLS, 

Counselor NNCF, sued in individual capacity; NANCY NINE, 

Counselor (NCF), sued in individual capacity; KAREN 

PSZCZOLKOWSKI, Warden (NCF), sued in individual capacity; 

BRANDY MILLER, Associate Warden of Programs, sued in 

individual capacity; JANE/JOHN DOE, Unknown Defendants 

Through Discovery,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern 

District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, 

Jr., Senior District Judge. (5:14-cv-00119-FPS-JSK)

Submitted: November 17, 2015 Decided: November 20, 2015

Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Roger Dale Persinger, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. John Eric 

Barchiesi, LAW OFFICES OF BERNARD J. KELLY, Pittsburgh, 

Appeal: 15-7284 Doc: 11 Filed: 11/20/2015 Pg: 1 of 3
2

Pennsylvania, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-7284 Doc: 11 Filed: 11/20/2015 Pg: 2 of 3
3

PER CURIAM:

Roger Dale Persinger, Jr., appeals the district court’s 

order adopting the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation 

and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. On 

appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the 

Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Here, the district 

court dismissed the complaint based on Persinger’s failure to 

exhaust administrative remedies, but Persinger does not 

meaningfully address exhaustion in his informal brief on appeal. 

Because Persinger’s informal brief does not challenge the basis 

for the district court’s disposition, Persinger has forfeited

appellate review of the court’s order. Accordingly, we affirm 

the district court’s judgment. 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

Appeal: 15-7284 Doc: 11 Filed: 11/20/2015 Pg: 3 of 3