Case Name: Simon ALLEN, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Bryan LOUIS, Defendant-Appellee, and Greenwood County Sheriffs Department; Greenwood Solicitor, Office; B. Ware; N. Futch; R. Coker; Tony Davis; Lonnie Smith; Ronnie Powell; C. Rayan Johnson; Walter Rutledge; Brooks; William Kay; David M. Stumbo, Defendants
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-03-01
Citations: 633 F. App'x 594
Docket Number: No. 15-7687
Parties: Simon ALLEN, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Bryan LOUIS, Defendant-Appellee, and Greenwood County Sheriffs Department; Greenwood Solicitor, Office; B. Ware; N. Futch; R. Coker; Tony Davis; Lonnie Smith; Ronnie Powell; C. Rayan Johnson; Walter Rutledge; Brooks; William Kay; David M. Stumbo, Defendants.
Judges: Before SHEDD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 633
Pages: 594–595

Head Matter:
Simon ALLEN, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Bryan LOUIS, Defendant-Appellee, and Greenwood County Sheriffs Department; Greenwood Solicitor, Office; B. Ware; N. Futch; R. Coker; Tony Davis; Lonnie Smith; Ronnie Powell; C. Rayan Johnson; Walter Rutledge; Brooks; William Kay; David M. Stumbo, Defendants.
No. 15-7687.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Feb. 25, 2016.
Decided: March 1, 2016.
Simon Allen, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Carly Marie Harter, Russell W. Harter, Jr., Chapman, Harter & Harter, PA, Green-ville, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Before SHEDD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Simon Allen, Jr., appeals the district court's order accepting the magistrate judge's recommendation to deny Allen's motion for a declaratory judgment and injunctive relief and grant Louis summary judgment on Allen's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) claim against Louis. Allen's failure to challenge on appeal the district court's dispositive holdings amounts to a waiver of appellate review of those holdings. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b) ("The Court will limit its review to the issues raised in the informal brief."); United States v. Al-Hamdi, 356 F.3d 564, 571 n. 8 (4th Cir.2004) ("It is a well settled rule that contentions not raised in the argument section of the opening brief are abandoned."). Because we find no reversible error by the district court, we affirm the district court's judgment. Allen v. Louis, No. 8:15-cv-00363-RMG, 2015 WL 6125520 (D.S.C. Oct. 15, 2015). 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.
The district court previously dismissed, without prejudice, Allen's claims against the remaining Defendants. Allen does not challenge this prior order on appeal.