Case Name: Darrel A. WHITE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. W. JACKSON, Chaplain; Foster, Treatment Program Supervisor; V. Antorn, Health Administrator, Defendants-Appellees, and J. Adams, Operations Officer; A. David Robinson, Chief of Corrections Operations; E. P. Witt, Grievance Coordinator, Defendants
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-12-07
Citations: 705 F. App'x 199
Docket Number: No. 17-6875
Parties: Darrel A. WHITE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. W. JACKSON, Chaplain; Foster, Treatment Program Supervisor; V. Antorn, Health Administrator, Defendants-Appellees, and J. Adams, Operations Officer; A. David Robinson, Chief of Corrections Operations; E. P. Witt, Grievance Coordinator, Defendants.
Judges: Before DUNCAN, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 705
Pages: 199–199

Head Matter:
Darrel A. WHITE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. W. JACKSON, Chaplain; Foster, Treatment Program Supervisor; V. Antorn, Health Administrator, Defendants-Appellees, and J. Adams, Operations Officer; A. David Robinson, Chief of Corrections Operations; E. P. Witt, Grievance Coordinator, Defendants.
No. 17-6875
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: November 29, 2017
Decided: December 7, 2017
Darrel A. White, Appellant Pro Se. Laura Maughan, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia; Ramon Rodriguez, III, RAWLS LAW GROUP, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
Before DUNCAN, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Darrel A. White appeals the district court's order granting summary judgment in favor of Appellees in White's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. White v. Jackson, No. 2:16-cv-00597-MSD-LRL (E.D. Va. June 28, 2017). We grant White's motion for leave to use the original record but deny his motions for appointment of counsel and for a transcript at government expense. 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
We construe White's informal brief as also challenging the district court's December 22, 2016, and March 29, 2017, orders. While we conclude that we have jurisdiction to review those orders, see Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 176-77 (4th Cir. 2014) (discussing compliance with Fed. R. App. P. 3), White has forfeited appellate review of the December 22 order, see id. at 177 (limiting appellate review to issues raised .in informal brief). Further, contrary to White's apparent assertion on appeal, the March 29 order did not rule that any of his claims should be rejected for failure to exhaust administrative remedies.