Court Opinion

ID: 9892798
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-24 21:00:50.772734+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:46:30.360579
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1565      Doc: 12         Filed: 10/23/2023     Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 23-1565

        KEVIN SLEEM,

                             Plaintiff - Appellant,

                      v.

        UNITED STATES FEDERAL GOVERNMENT; UNITED STATES
        DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION; UNC CHAPEL HILL, Dorms, Student
        Housing; FLORIDA ATLANTIC UNIVERSITY, College of Business; DURHAM
        TECHNICAL COMMUNITY COLLEGE, Engineering Department,

                             Defendants - Appellees.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
        Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:22-cv-00355-FL)

        Submitted: October 19, 2023                                   Decided: October 23, 2023

        Before KING and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Kevin Sleem, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-1565       Doc: 12         Filed: 10/23/2023      Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Kevin Sleem appeals the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s

        recommendation to dismiss, after a review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), Sleem’s civil

        complaint against Defendants. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the

        informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Sleem’s informal and supplemental informal

        briefs fail to meaningfully challenge the district court’s rationale for dismissing his claims,

        Sleem has forfeited appellate review of the court’s disposition. 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.”). To the extent

        Sleem seeks to raise new claims or to introduce evidence for the first time on appeal, he

        may not do so. See Holly Hill Farm Corp. v. United States, 447 F.3d 258, 267 (4th Cir.

        2006). We therefore affirm the district court’s order. Sleem v. U.S. Fed. Gov’t, No. 5:22-

        cv-00355-FL (E.D.N.C. Apr. 27, 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