Maurice Juggins, a Virginia inmate, appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2000). In his informal appellate brief, Juggins failed to address the district court’s basis for dismissing his claims against Janet Wurie, Dr. Malik, and Nurse Hardy. Therefore, Juggins has waived appellate review of those claims. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b) (“The Court will limit its review to the issues raised in the informal brief.”). We have reviewed the record as to Juggins’ claims against the remaining Defendants and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Juggins v. Wurie, No. 1:07-cv01126-TSE-TCB (E.D.Va. Nov. 23, 2007). We also deny Juggins’ motions for appointment of counsel and dismissal of payments for filing fees. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.