Abir Ali v. ESKER LEE TATUM, Warden; JOHN DOE; JOHN DOE

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 23-7309
ABIR ALI,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
ESKER LEE TATUM, Warden; JOHN DOE; JOHN DOE,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Richmond. David J. Novak, District Judge. (3:23-cv-00616-DJN-MRC)
Submitted: April 18, 2024 Decided: April 22, 2024
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Abir Ali, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Abir Ali appeals the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 complaint for failing to comply with a court directive to complete a consent to
collection of fees form.∗ On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the
informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Ali’s informal brief does not challenge the
procedural 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
∗ The dismissal order is final and appealable because the district court did not grant
leave to amend. Britt v. DeJoy, 45 F.4th 790, 791 (4th Cir. 2022) (en banc) (order).

-- 2 of 2 --