Case Name: Katherine B. ROBINSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, and Dana B. Williams, Plaintiff, v. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE DRUG ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATION, (DOJ/DEA); Virginia Employment Commission, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-04-25
Citations: 686 F. App'x 159
Docket Number: No. 17-1036
Parties: Katherine B. ROBINSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, and Dana B. Williams, Plaintiff, v. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE DRUG ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATION, (DOJ/DEA); Virginia Employment Commission, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 686
Pages: 159–159

Head Matter:
Katherine B. ROBINSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, and Dana B. Williams, Plaintiff, v. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE DRUG ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATION, (DOJ/DEA); Virginia Employment Commission, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 17-1036
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: April 20, 2017
Decided: April 25, 2017
Katherine B. Robinson, Appellant Pro Se.
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Katherine B. Robinson appeals the district court's order dismissing on res judica-ta grounds her civil complaint against the Department of Justice Drug Enforcement Administration and the Virginia Employment Commission, and the district court's order issuing a pre-filing injunction against Robinson for her repeated filing of similar complaints against these Defendants. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant's brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Robinson's opening and supplemental informal briefs do not challenge the basis for the district court's dis-positive rulings, Robinson 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 Robinson v. DOJ/DEA, No. 8:16-cv-03850-DKC (D. Md. Dec. 22, 2016 & Jan. 3, 2017). 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