Court Opinion

ID: 9375075
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-02-24 21:00:46.263481+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:16:56.236151
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-6699      Doc: 14          Filed: 02/23/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 22-6699

        WILLIAM FRANCE,

                             Plaintiff - Appellant,

                      v.

        CENTRAL PRISON,

                             Defendant - Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
        Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:22-ct-03136-BO)

        Submitted: February 21, 2023                                  Decided: February 23, 2023

        Before NIEMEYER and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        William France, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-6699         Doc: 14      Filed: 02/23/2023      Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               William France appeals the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice his

        42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to prosecute. On appeal, we confine our review to the

        issues raised in the informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because France’s informal brief

        does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, he has forfeited appellate

        review of the court’s order. See Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014)

        (“The informal brief is an important document; under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is

        limited to issues preserved in that brief.”). 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 this court and argument would not aid the

        decisional process.

                                                                                        AFFIRMED

                                                     2