Court Opinion

ID: 8454651
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-11-05 03:09:26.83243+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:49:02.686249
License: Public Domain

PER CURIAM:
Nathan A. Silla appeals the district court’s order denying his post-judgment motion for the preparation of various transcripts at Government expense. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Silla’s informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, Silla 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 this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

 For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date appearing on the notice of appeal is the earliest date it could have been properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to the court. Fed. R.App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 108 S.Ct. 2379, 101 L.Ed.2d 245 (1988).