Court Opinion

ID: 9412262
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-07-28 21:02:23.549995+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:41:38.472075
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1215      Doc: 9        Filed: 07/27/2023     Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 23-1215

        DEBBIE BENJAMIN,

                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

                     v.

        UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; HOUSING SERVICE CENTER,

                            Defendants - Appellees.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
        Norfolk. Mark S. Davis, Chief District Judge. (2:22-cv-00100-MSD-DEM)

        Submitted: July 25, 2023                                            Decided: July 27, 2023

        Before WYNN and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Debbie Benjamin, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-1215       Doc: 9         Filed: 07/27/2023      Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Debbie Benjamin appeals the district court’s order dismissing her civil action for

        lack of subject matter jurisdiction. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised

        in the informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Benjamin’s informal brief does not

        challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, she 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