Dayana Itati Rivera Guzman, by v. United States Department of State

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 25-1815
DAYANA ITATI RIVERA GUZMAN, by and through their father and next friend,
Patrick Rivera; PAULA ANDREA RIVERA BAYAREGUA, by and through their
father and next friend, Patrick Rivera; J.M.R.B., a minor child, by and through their
father and next friend, Patrick Rivera; M.F.R.M., a minor child, by and through their
father and next friend, Patrick Rivera; S.R.R., a minor adopted child, by and through
their father and next friend, Patrick Rivera; D.S.R.R., a minor adopted child by and
through their father and next friend, Patrick Rivera; J.R.R., a minor adopted child,
by and through their father and next friend, Patrick; PATRICK RIVERA, on behalf
of his children,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
v.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE; PASSPORT OFFICE; MARCO
RUBIO, in his official capacity,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Richmond. Roderick Charles Young, District Judge. (3:25-cv-00338-RCY)
Submitted: January 22, 2026 Decided: January 28, 2026
Before AGEE, RICHARDSON, and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

-- 1 of 3 --

2
Dayana Itati Rivera Guzman, Paula Andrea Rivera Bayaregua, J.M.R.B., M.F.R.M.,
S.R.R., D.S.R.R., J.R.R., Patrick Rivera, Appellants Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 2 of 3 --

3
PER CURIAM:
Patrick Rivera appeals the district court’s order dismissing his civil action brought
on behalf of his seven children. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in
the informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Rivera’s informal brief does not
challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition (its conclusion that Rivera may not
litigate claims in federal court on behalf of his minor children), 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.”). However, even had Rivera not forfeited
appellate review, our review of the record discloses no reversible error. See Myers v.
Loudoun Cnty. Pub. Schs., 418 F.3d 395, 400-01 (4th Cir. 2005) (holding that generally a
parent may not proceed pro se on behalf of his or her child). Accordingly, we deny Rivera’s
motions for emergency injunctive relief and for oral argument or, in the alternative,
summary reversal, and we affirm the district court’s order. Rivera Guzman v. U.S. Dep’t
of State, No. 3:25-cv-00338-RCY (E.D. Va. June 10, 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

-- 3 of 3 --