Opinion
21-1384
09-17-2021
THADDEUS DARNELL COSBY, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. TOWN OF FARMVILLE; FARMVILLE POLICE DEPARTMENT; H. A. HOYLE, JR., Individually and in his Official Capacity as an Officer of the Farmville Police Department; STEWART GODSEY, Individually and in his Official Capacity as an Officer of the Farmville Police Department; THE ESTATE OF TIMOTHY M. BOURNE; OFFICE OF THE COMMONWEALTH'S ATTORNEY FOR PRINCE EDWARD COUNTY, VIRGINIA; MORGAN GREER, Individually and in his Official Capacity as Assistant Commonwealth's Attorney for Prince Edward County, Virginia; J. DAVID EMET, Individually; UNKNOWN OFFICERS, 1 - 11, Defendants - Appellees.
Thaddeus Darnell Cosby, Appellant Pro Se. Maurice Scott Fisher, Jr., HARMAN CLAYTOR CORRIGAN &WELLMAN, Glen Allen, Virginia, for Appellees.
UNPUBLISHED
Submitted: September 14, 2021
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior District Judge. (3:20-cv-00494-REP)
Thaddeus Darnell Cosby, Appellant Pro Se.
Maurice Scott Fisher, Jr., HARMAN CLAYTOR CORRIGAN &WELLMAN, Glen Allen, Virginia, for Appellees.
Before THACKER and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM
Thaddeus Darnell Cosby appeals the district court's order denying his motions for extensions of time to serve his complaint on some Defendants and to file a response to other Defendants' motion to dismiss in Cosby's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action, and dismissing Cosby's claims against those Defendants.[*] On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Cosby'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 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 [*] As the district court has since disposed of Cosby's claims against the remaining Defendants in the action, we may consider his appeal of this order. See Houck v. Substitute Tr. Servs., Inc., 791 F.3d 473, 479 (4th Cir. 2015) (discussing doctrine of cumulative finality).