Case Name: Huey P. GARDNER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CADDO PARISH SHERIFF; Caddo Parish Commission, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-09-19
Citations: 540 F. App'x 336
Docket Number: No. 13-30237
Parties: Huey P. GARDNER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CADDO PARISH SHERIFF; Caddo Parish Commission, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before WIENER, OWEN, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 540
Pages: 336–336

Head Matter:
Huey P. GARDNER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CADDO PARISH SHERIFF; Caddo Parish Commission, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 13-30237
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Sept. 19, 2013.
Huey P. Gardner, Shreveport, LA, pro se.
Before WIENER, OWEN, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Proceeding pro se, Huey P. Gardner filed a civil action, alleging that the defendants violated his constitutional rights while he was previously a prisoner at Cad-do Correctional Center by keeping him in 24-hour lockdown and administrative segregation for four months because he refused tuberculosis testing. During the pendency of his action, Gardner filed a motion for injunctive relief, arguing that he should be allowed to enter the courthouse with a cellular phone and without presenting government-issued identification. The district court dismissed Gardner's civil action as frivolous and denied his motion for injunctive relief.
Although pro se briefs are afforded liberal construction, even pro se litigants must brief arguments to preserve them. Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir.1993). By failing to raise any arguments challenging the district court's dismissal of his action, Gardner has abandoned any such challenge. See id. Accordingly, we AFFIRM the district court judgment dismissing Gardner's action. His appeal from the denial of his motion for injunctive relief is DISMISSED as moot. See Motient Corp. v. Dondero, 529 F.3d 532, 537 (5th Cir.2008); cf. Ortez v. Chandler, 845 F.2d 573, 574-75 (5th Cir.1988) (holding that challenge to bond determination was rendered moot by alien's subsequent deportation).
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.