Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-15-06098/USCOURTS-ca4-15-06098-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
W. David Guice

Carl Joyner

Larken
Appellee
Mattioli
Appellee
Frank Perry

Edward Reese
Appellant
Kieran J. Shanahan

Jeanine Slater
Appellee
George T. Solomon

Cynthia Thornton

Reuben Young

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-6098

EDWARD REESE,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

JEANINE SLATER; DR. MATTIOLI; MS. LARKEN,

Defendants – Appellees,

and

KIERAN J. SHANAHAN; REUBEN YOUNG; W. DAVID GUICE; GEORGE T. 

SOLOMON; CARL JOYNER; CYNTHIA THORNTON; FRANK PERRY,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, 

District Judge. (5:13-ct-03126-BO)

Submitted: March 17, 2015 Decided: March 20, 2015

Before WILKINSON and KING, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Edward Reese, Appellant Pro Se. Kimberly D. Grande, NORTH 

CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina; Nathan 

Douglas Childs, Elizabeth Pharr McCullough, YOUNG MOORE & 

Appeal: 15-6098 Doc: 17 Filed: 03/20/2015 Pg: 1 of 3
2

HENDERSON, PA, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-6098 Doc: 17 Filed: 03/20/2015 Pg: 2 of 3
3

PER CURIAM:

Edward Reese appeals the district court’s order dismissing 

without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) civil rights 

action for failure to exhaust his available administrative 

remedies. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised 

in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because 

Reese’s informal brief does not challenge the basis for the 

district court’s disposition, Reese 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: 15-6098 Doc: 17 Filed: 03/20/2015 Pg: 3 of 3