Court Opinion

ID: 9930415
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-06 21:00:41.940358+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:18:05.370290
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6507      Doc: 8         Filed: 02/05/2024      Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                                UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 23-6507

        WILLIAM WASHINGTON,

                             Plaintiff - Appellant,

                      v.

        JOHN CANNON FEW, Chief Judge, S.C. Court of Appeals; V. CLAIRE ALLEN,

                             Defendants - Appellees.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Beaufort.
        Mary G. Lewis, District Judge. (9:22-cv-02486-MGL)

        Submitted: January 30, 2024                                       Decided: February 5, 2024

        Before KING, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        William Washington, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-6507      Doc: 8         Filed: 02/05/2024      Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               William Washington appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C.

        § 1983 complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). In his informal brief, Washington does not

        challenge the bases for the district court’s decision. As such, he has waived any argument

        that the district court’s ruling was in error. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b); Jackson v. Lightsey, 775

        F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (recognizing that “[t]he 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 order. Washington v. Few, No. 9:22-

        cv-02486-MGL (D.S.C. Apr. 20, 2023). 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