Before FLOYD, THACKER, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.
Starsha M. Sewell, Appellant Pro Se.
Starsha M. Sewell appeals the district court's order denying her Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion for relief from the court's previously issued and modified prefiling injunction and the court's notices returning certain pleadings to Sewell pursuant to that injunction. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Sewell's informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court's disposition, she 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 order. 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Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Was this helpful?
Response sent, thank you
Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.