Opinion
22-2003
02-21-2023
CURTISS DAVIS, III, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. PEDRO BONILLA; EL CARBONERO, LLC, Defendants - Appellees.
Curtiss Davis, III, Appellant Pro Se.
UNPUBLISHED
Submitted: February 16, 2023
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Rossie David Alston, Jr., District Judge. (1:20-cv-00992-RDA-WEF)
Curtiss Davis, III, Appellant Pro Se.
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, RUSHING, Circuit Judge, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Curtiss Davis, III, appeals the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge, denying Davis' motion for default judgment, and denying Davis' other pending motions.[ *] We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Davis v. Bonilla, No. 1:20-cv-00992-RDA-WEF (E.D. Va. Aug. 19, 2022). 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
[*] We observe that Davis' informal brief does not address the other rulings in either the appealed-from dispositive order or in any of the court's earlier orders. Because we limit our review to the issues raised in an appellant's informal brief, see 4th Cir. R. 34(b), Davis has forfeited appellate review as to these rulings, 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.").