# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

No. 19

- 50856 Summary Calendar

**Rosa Serrano,**

Plaintiff

— Appellant **,**

versus

**Ann Crawford**

**- McClure,**  Chief Justice Eight Court of Appeals **; Jaime Esparza,**  District Attorney **; Jesus Herrera,** Criminal County Court at Law **; Steven Hughes,** Eleventh Court of Appeals **; Virgil Mulanax,**  County Court of Law #7 **; Gina Palafox,** Justice Eight Court of Appeals **; Yvonne Rodriguez,** Justice Eight Court of Appeal s **; Richard Wiles,**  Sheriff **,** El Paso County **; Stephen Ables,** Regional Administrative Judge District Six **; Luis Aguilar,** 243rd District Court for Texas **,**
Defendants

— Appellees

**.**

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 6:19

- CV

- 336

Before **Clement, Higginson,** and **Engelhardt,** Circuit Judges

**.** United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED March 17, 2021
Lyle W. Cayc e Clerk Case: 19-50856 Document: 00515785242 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/17/2021No. 19

- 50856

2 **Per Curiam :**  * Rosa Serrano, Texas prisoner # 2151723, filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against numerous defendants , challenging two state criminal contempt orders and her state Medicaid fraud conviction. The district court dismissed her complaint for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e).
Serrano rea sserts her claims and argues that the criminal contempt orders
and her Medicaid fraud conviction were void due to violations of her constitutional rights; the state courts lacked jurisdiction because she removed the state criminal cases to federal court; a nd the appellees were not entitled to immunity due to their misconduct

. On appeal, Serrano makes numerous arguments but has not identified any error in the district court’s reasons for dismissing her claims for failure to state a claim under § 1915(e). When an appellant fails to identify any error in the district court’s analysis, it is the same as if the appellant had not appealed the issue. Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner , 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987). Although pro se briefs are afforded liberal construction, Haines v. Kerner , 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972), even pro se litigants must brief arguments to preserve them, Yohey v. Collins , 985 F.2d 222, 224

– 25 (5th Cir. 1993). Thu s , Serrano has abandoned any argument that the district court erred in dismissing her complaint for failure to state a claim.
See Brinkmann , 813 F.2d at 748; see also United States v. Whitfield , 590 F.3d 325, 346 (5th Cir. 2009) . Accordingly, the district court’s judgment is

**AFFIRMED.** Serrano’s motion to appoint counsel and to abate the appeal

* Pursuant to **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  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 cuit**  **R ule**  47.5.4. Case: 19-50856 Document: 00515785242 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/17/2021No. 19

- 50856

3 i s **DENIED** . Her motion to suspen d the collection of appeal fees is also

**DENIED.**

The district court ’s dismissal of her complaint for fail ure to state a claim evidently counts as a strike under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Serrano is
**ADVISED** that if she accumulates three strikes, she will not be able to proceed in forma pauperis in any civil action or appeal filed while she is
incarcerated or detai ned in any facility unless she is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. See id

. Case: 19-50856 Document: 00515785242 Page: 3 Date Filed: 03/17/2021