Case Name: Edmond MACHIE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Amber ULLAH, Collector, Fairfax County Federal Credit Union; Gustavo Fernandez, Collector, Fairfax County Federal Credit Union; Patrick McInereney, Collector, Fairfax County Federal Credit Union; Donald E. Coulter, Esquire, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-10-15
Citations: 485 F. App'x 623
Docket Number: No. 12-1556
Parties: Edmond MACHIE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Amber ULLAH, Collector, Fairfax County Federal Credit Union; Gustavo Fernandez, Collector, Fairfax County Federal Credit Union; Patrick McInereney, Collector, Fairfax County Federal Credit Union; Donald E. Coulter, Esquire, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before KING, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 485
Pages: 623–624

Head Matter:
Edmond MACHIE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Amber ULLAH, Collector, Fairfax County Federal Credit Union; Gustavo Fernandez, Collector, Fairfax County Federal Credit Union; Patrick McInereney, Collector, Fairfax County Federal Credit Union; Donald E. Coulter, Esquire, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 12-1556.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Oct. 11, 2012.
Decided: Oct. 15, 2012.
Edmond Machie, Appellant Pro Se. Richard D. Holzheimer, Jr., Amy Sanborn Owen, Cochran & Owen, LLC, Vienna, Virginia; John Elphinstone McIntosh, Jr., Fairfax, Virginia, for Appellees.
Before KING, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Edmond Machie appeals the district court's order denying his motion for an extension of time and dismissing his civil complaint. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant's brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Machie's informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court's disposition, Machie 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 contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED.