Filed: Sep. 02, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-1635 MANSA MUSA-BEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. WILLIAM M. DUNN, Master in Chancery; JOSEPH J. DIPRIMIO, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, Senior District Judge. (1:14-cv-01896-WMN) Submitted: August 28, 2014 Decided: September 2, 2014 Before WILKINSON, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opin
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-1635 MANSA MUSA-BEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. WILLIAM M. DUNN, Master in Chancery; JOSEPH J. DIPRIMIO, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, Senior District Judge. (1:14-cv-01896-WMN) Submitted: August 28, 2014 Decided: September 2, 2014 Before WILKINSON, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opini..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-1635 MANSA MUSA-BEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. WILLIAM M. DUNN, Master in Chancery; JOSEPH J. DIPRIMIO, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, Senior District Judge. (1:14-cv-01896-WMN) Submitted: August 28, 2014 Decided: September 2, 2014 Before WILKINSON, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Mansa Musa-Bey, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Mansa Musa-Bey appeals the district court’s order dismissing his civil complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Musa-Bey’s informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, Musa-Bey has forfeited appellate review of the court’s order. Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis and 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 2
