Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Charles E. LOUTHER, Jr., Claimant-Appellant, and Currency, $41,939.00 in U.S.; 2001 ACURA CL, VIN 19UYA42611A022790, Defendants, Shakita Louther; Capital One Auto Finance, Inc., Claimants
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-08-27
Citations: 485 F. App'x 618
Docket Number: No. 11-2244
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Charles E. LOUTHER, Jr., Claimant-Appellant, and Currency, $41,939.00 in U.S.; 2001 ACURA CL, VIN 19UYA42611A022790, Defendants, Shakita Louther; Capital One Auto Finance, Inc., Claimants.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 485
Pages: 618–619

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Charles E. LOUTHER, Jr., Claimant-Appellant, and Currency, $41,939.00 in U.S.; 2001 ACURA CL, VIN 19UYA42611A022790, Defendants, Shakita Louther; Capital One Auto Finance, Inc., Claimants.
No. 11-2244.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Aug. 21, 2012.
Decided: Aug. 27, 2012.
Charles E. Louther, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Lynne P. Klauer, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
ON PETITION FOR REHEARING
PER CURIAM:
Charles E. Louther, Jr., appeals the district court's orders granting the United States' motion to strike his answer and claim to seized money for lack of standing and denying leave to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP") on appeal. We initially affirmed the district court's denial of IFP status and dismissed Louther's appeal of the court's order granting the motion to strike for lack of jurisdiction. We now grant Louther's petition for rehearing.
We confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant's brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Louther's informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court's denial of IFP status, we affirm the court's order. Turning to the district court's order granting the United States' motion to strike, we have reviewed the order and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Currency, $41,939.00 in U.S., No. 1:09-cv-00164-NCT-PTS (M.D.N.C. Sept. 6, 2011).
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED.