Case Name: Robert BRAYBOY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ROBESON COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-11-24
Citations: 401 F. App'x 802
Docket Number: No. 10-1201
Parties: Robert BRAYBOY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ROBESON COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before SHEDD and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 401
Pages: 802–803

Head Matter:
Robert BRAYBOY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ROBESON COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 10-1201.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Nov. 18, 2010.
Decided: Nov. 24, 2010.
Robert Brayboy, Appellant Pro Se. Curtis Hudson Allen, III, Deborah R. Stagner, Tharrington & Smith, LLP, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before SHEDD and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Robert Brayboy appeals from the district court's judgment in Defendant's favor on his racial harassment and discrimina tion and retaliation claims, brought pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C.A. § 2000e to 2000e-17 (West 2008 & Supp. 2010), and his disability harassment claim, brought pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C.A. § 12101 to 12213 (West 2005 & Supp. 2010). In his informal brief, Brayboy fails to address the district court's dispositive reasons for disposing of his claims and, thus, has forfeited appellate review of those rulings. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b) (limiting review to issues raised in the informal brief); 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 judgment. See Brayboy v. Robeson County Bd. of Educ., No. 7:07-cv-00204-H (E.D.N.C. Jan. 20, 2010). 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.