YOUNG v. HILL (2020)

Jessie Young appeals the district court's order dismissing his civil action without prejudice for failure to comply with the court's previous order directing him to indicate whether he intended to prosecute his claims within 10 days of the court's order.^* See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in Young's informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because the informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court's disposition, Young 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. Young v. Hill, No. 1:16-cv-1304-CFM-JFA (E.D. Va. March 2, 2020). 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.   Because the district court dismissed Young's action “for procedural reasons unrelated to the contents of the pleadings,” and he could not cure the defect by amendment, we have jurisdiction over this appeal. Goode v. Cent. Va. Legal Aid Soc'y, Inc., 807 F.3d 619, 624 (4th Cir. 2015); see GO Computer, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., 508 F.3d 170, 176 (4th Cir. 2007); see also Bing v. Brivo Sys., LLC, 959 F.3d 605, 610 (4th Cir. 2020).

PER CURIAM:

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.