MATOUSEK v. REALTY (2019)

Susan Neal Matousek appeals the district court's order dismissing her second amended complaint for failure to state a claim and for failure to effect timely service. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant's brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Matousek's informal brief does not challenge the bases for the district court's disposition, Matousek 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 grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis and affirm the district court's judgment. We deny Matousek's motion for an en banc hearing in May 2019 and 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Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.