Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-15-07687/USCOURTS-ca4-15-07687-0/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UNPUBLISHED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. 15-7687

SIMON ALLEN, JR.,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

BRYAN LOUIS,

Defendant – Appellee,

and

GREENWOOD COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT; GREENWOOD SOLICITOR, 

Office; B. WARE; N. FUTCH; R. COKER; TONY DAVIS; LONNIE 

SMITH; RONNIE POWELL; C. RAYAN JOHNSON; WALTER RUTLEDGE; 

BROOKS; WILLIAM KAY; DAVID M. STUMBO,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Anderson. Richard Mark Gergel, District 

Judge. (8:15-cv-00363-RMG)

Submitted: February 25, 2016 Decided: March 1, 2016

Before SHEDD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Simon Allen, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Carly Marie Harter, Russell 

W. Harter, Jr., CHAPMAN, HARTER & HARTER, PA, Greenville, South 

Appeal: 15-7687 Doc: 11 Filed: 03/01/2016 Pg: 1 of 3
2

Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-7687 Doc: 11 Filed: 03/01/2016 Pg: 2 of 3
3

PER CURIAM:

Simon Allen, Jr., appeals the district court’s order 

accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation to deny Allen’s 

motion for a declaratory judgment and injunctive relief and 

grant Louis summary judgment on Allen’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) 

claim against Louis.* Allen’s failure to challenge on appeal the 

district court’s dispositive holdings amounts to a waiver of 

appellate review of those holdings. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b) (“The 

Court will limit its review to the issues raised in the informal 

brief.”); United States v. Al-Hamdi, 356 F.3d 564, 571 n.8 (4th 

Cir. 2004) (“It is a well settled rule that contentions not 

raised in the argument section of the opening brief are 

abandoned.”). Because we find no reversible error by the 

district court, we affirm the district court’s judgment. Allen 

v. Louis, No. 8:15-cv-00363-RMG (D.S.C. Oct. 16, 2015). 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

 * The district court previously dismissed, without 

prejudice, Allen’s claims against the remaining Defendants. 

Allen does not challenge this prior order on appeal.

Appeal: 15-7687 Doc: 11 Filed: 03/01/2016 Pg: 3 of 3