COLEY v. COOPER (2018)

Roger Earl Coley appeals the district court's order dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) action.^* On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant's brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because his informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court's disposition, Coley 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 deny Coley's motion objecting to the terms of the Prisoner Litigation Reform Act. 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

FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTE.   Although the district court dismissed Coley's action without prejudice, we have jurisdiction over this appeal because the district court's order makes clear that Coley could not “save his action by merely amending his complaint.” Goode v. Cent. Va. Legal Aid Soc'y, Inc., 807 F.3d 619, 623 (4th Cir. 2015) (internal quotation marks omitted).

PER CURIAM:

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.