SIKES v. WARD (2018)

Lindsay W. Sikes, Jr., appeals the district court's orders dismissing his amended civil complaint and denying his postjudgment motions. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant's brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Sikes’ informal brief does not challenge the district court's dispositive procedural rulings in the order dismissing the amended complaint, Sikes has forfeited appellate review of that 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. Although Sikes has properly challenged the court's order denying his postjudgment motions, we find no reversible error and affirm. Sikes v. Ward, No. 1:16-cv-04108-TDC (D. Md. Aug. 1, 2018). We deny as moot Sikes’ motion for a stay pending appeal. 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

PER CURIAM:

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.