CRAWFORD v. NEWMAN (2021)

Lawrence Crawford appeals the district court's order adopting the magistrate judge's recommendation to dismiss without prejudice his complaint against Defendants.^* On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Crawford's informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court's disposition, he 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 Crawford's motion to remand and deny as moot Crawford's motion for an extension of time to file documents required by 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 the action without prejudice, we have jurisdiction over this appeal. See Bing v. Brivo Sys., LLC, 959 F.3d 605, 615 (4th Cir. 2020).

PER CURIAM:

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.