Case Name: Bruce BUNTING, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Roy A. COOPER, North Carolina Governor; UNC Medical Center; Dr. James Engleman, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-11-09
Citations: 700 F. App'x 315
Docket Number: No. 17-6839
Parties: Bruce BUNTING, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Roy A. COOPER, North Carolina Governor; UNC Medical Center; Dr. James Engleman, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, DUNCAN, Circuit Judge, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 700
Pages: 315–316

Head Matter:
Bruce BUNTING, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Roy A. COOPER, North Carolina Governor; UNC Medical Center; Dr. James Engleman, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 17-6839
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: October 31, 2017
Decided: November 9, 2017
Bruce Bunting, Appellant Pro Se. Joseph Finarelli, Special Deputy Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Ap-pellee.
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, DUNCAN, Circuit Judge, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Bruce Bunting appeals the district court's order adopting the magistrate judge's recommendation and dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint and motion for an emergency injunction. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant's brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Bunting's informal briefs do not challenge the bases for the district court's dismissal of his complaint, we conclude that Bunting has forfeited appellate review of the issue. See Williams v. Giant Food Inc., 370 F.3d 423, 430 n.4 (4th Cir. 2004). We further conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Bunting's motion for an emergency injunction. See League of Women Voters of N.C. v. North Carolina, 769 F.3d 224, 235 (4th Cir. 2014). Accordingly, we affirm the district court's order. We also deny as moot Bunting's motion for reconsideration of this court's order denying his Fed. R. App. P. 8(a) motion, and we deny Bunting's petitions for a writ of mandamus. 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