Case Name: Carolyn E. REED-SMITH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SPARTANBURG COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT SEVEN, DefendantAppellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-05-21
Citations: 603 F. App'x 227
Docket Number: No. 15-1300
Parties: Carolyn E. REED-SMITH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SPARTANBURG COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT SEVEN, DefendantAppellee.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 603
Pages: 227–228

Head Matter:
Carolyn E. REED-SMITH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SPARTANBURG COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT SEVEN, DefendantAppellee.
No. 15-1300.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: May 19, 2015.
Decided: May 21, 2015.
Carolyn E. Reed-Smith, Appellant Pro Se. Carlos C. Johnson, Kenneth William Nettles, Jr., Lyles Darr & Clark, LLP, Spartanburg, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Before NIEMEYER 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Carolyn E. Reed-Smith appeals the district court's order denying her Fed. R.Civ.P. 60(b) motion. On appeal, we con-fíne our review to the issues raised in the Appellant's brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Reed-Smith's informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court's disposition, Reed-Smith has forfeited appellate review of the court's order. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's judgment. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal conten-, tions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED.