Khalah Sabbakhan v. Lynn Brice; Jennifer Nesbitt

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 25-1225
KHALAH SABBAKHAN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
LYNN BRICE; JENNIFER NESBITT,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Richmond. John A. Gibney, Jr., Senior District Judge. (3:24-cv-00910-JAG)
Submitted: June 12, 2025 Decided: June 17, 2025
Before HARRIS and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Khalah Sabbakhan, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Khalah Sabbakhan appeals the district court’s order dismissing her civil action
challenging the decisions of a lower state court for lack of subject matter jurisdiction
pursuant to the Rooker-Feldman∗ doctrine and dismissing her claims under the Americans
with Disabilities Act for failure to state a plausible claim for relief. On appeal, we confine
our review to the issues raised in the informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because
Sabbakhan’s informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition,
she 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 order. Sabbakhan v. Brice, 3:24-cv-00910-JAG (E.D. Va. Feb.
12, 2025). 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
∗ D.C. Ct. of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462 (1983); Rooker v. Fid. Tr. Co., 263
U.S. 413 (1923).

-- 2 of 2 --