Case Name: Larry DAVIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. WEISER SECURITY SERVICES, INC.; North Carolina National Guard; Randy Powell; James Roses; Jerry Bowman; Guy Maderes, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-08-22
Citations: 668 F. App'x 44
Docket Number: No. 16-1486
Parties: Larry DAVIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. WEISER SECURITY SERVICES, INC.; North Carolina National Guard; Randy Powell; James Roses; Jerry Bowman; Guy Maderes, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 668
Pages: 44–45

Head Matter:
Larry DAVIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. WEISER SECURITY SERVICES, INC.; North Carolina National Guard; Randy Powell; James Roses; Jerry Bowman; Guy Maderes, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 16-1486
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: August 18, 2016
Decided: August 22, 2016
Larry Davis, Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth Ruth Dangel, Ogletree Deakins Nash Smoak & Stewart, PC, Charlotte, North Carolina; Vanessa N. Totten, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Before WILKINSON, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Larry Davis appeals from the district court's judgment in Defendants' favor on Davis' racial harassment and discrimination claims, brought pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e to 2000e-17 (2012). Davis also challenges the district court's order granting Davis' motion for reconsideration, but reaffirming the dismissal order. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant's brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Davis' informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court's dispositive rulings, Davis has forfeited appellate review of the district court's orders. See Williams v. Giant Food Inc., 370 F.3d 423, 430 n.4 (4th Cir. 2004); see also Edwards v. City of Goldsboro, 178 F.3d 231, 241 n.6 (4th Cir. 1999) (failure to raise issue in opening brief constitutes abandonment of that issue). Accordingly, we affirm the district court's orders. See Davis v. Weiser Sec. Servs., Inc., No. 3:13-cv-00522-MOC-DSC (W.D.N.C. filed Mar. 1, 2016, entered Mar. 2, 2016; Mar. 31, 2016). 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