Case Name: Kim L. HARGETT, Sr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. JOHNS HOPKINS HOSPITAL; Raymond Neil Borland, Doctor; Thomas J. Polasck, Doctor; Norman J. Beauchamp, Doctor; Arjon S. Chanumugain, Doctor; Bronwnyn Jones, Doctor; Valerir Pomper, Doctor, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-10-20
Citations: 699 F. App'x 219
Docket Number: No. 17-6847
Parties: Kim L. HARGETT, Sr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. JOHNS HOPKINS HOSPITAL; Raymond Neil Borland, Doctor; Thomas J. Polasck, Doctor; Norman J. Beauchamp, Doctor; Arjon S. Chanumugain, Doctor; Bronwnyn Jones, Doctor; Valerir Pomper, Doctor, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before FLOYD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 699
Pages: 219–220

Head Matter:
Kim L. HARGETT, Sr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. JOHNS HOPKINS HOSPITAL; Raymond Neil Borland, Doctor; Thomas J. Polasck, Doctor; Norman J. Beauchamp, Doctor; Arjon S. Chanumugain, Doctor; Bronwnyn Jones, Doctor; Valerir Pomper, Doctor, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 17-6847
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: October 17, 2017
Decided: October 20, 2017
Kim L. Hargett, Sr., Appellant Pro Se.
Before FLOYD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Kim L. Hargett, Sr., appeals the district court's order dismissing his civil action without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant's brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Hargett's informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court's disposition, Hargett has forfeited appellate review of the court's order. See Williams v. Giant Food Inc., 370 F.3d 423, 430 n.4 (4th Cir. 2004). Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis and 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