Case Name: Adrin Kentral ROME, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jim O'SULLIVAN, Sheriff of Chesapeake Jail; Nurse Cordova, Nurse of Chesapeake City Jail; Nurse Martinez, Nurse for Chesapeake Jail; Officer Cipcic, c.o/ Deputy; John Doe, c.o/Deputy; Nurse Moss, Nurse, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-08-22
Citations: 696 F. App'x 127
Docket Number: No. 17-6791
Parties: Adrin Kentral ROME, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jim O’SULLIVAN, Sheriff of Chesapeake Jail; Nurse Cordova, Nurse of Chesapeake City Jail; Nurse Martinez, Nurse for Chesapeake Jail; Officer Cipcic, c.o/ Deputy; John Doe, c.o/Deputy; Nurse Moss, Nurse, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before KEENAN, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 696
Pages: 127–127

Head Matter:
Adrin Kentral ROME, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jim O’SULLIVAN, Sheriff of Chesapeake Jail; Nurse Cordova, Nurse of Chesapeake City Jail; Nurse Martinez, Nurse for Chesapeake Jail; Officer Cipcic, c.o/ Deputy; John Doe, c.o/Deputy; Nurse Moss, Nurse, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 17-6791
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: August 17, 2017
Decided: August 22, 2017
Adrin Kentral Rome, Appellant Pro Se.
Before KEENAN, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Adrin Kentral Rome appeals the district court's order dismissing his amended 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) civil rights action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(l) (2012) for failure to state a claim. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant's brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Rome's informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court's disposition, Rome 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 affirm the district court's judgment. We deny Rome's motion to appoint counsel and 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