Tiffer v. Worker's Compensation
Tiffer v. Worker's Compensation
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-1852
ROMAN TIFFER,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
WORKER=S COMPENSATION; LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE CORPORATION; ABACUS CORPORATION; THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR BALTIMORE CITY,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, District Judge. (1:08- cv-01417-JFM)
Submitted: October 21, 2008 Decided: October 24, 2008
Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Roman Tiffer, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
Roman Tiffer appeals the district court=s order dismissing
without prejudice his complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. '
1915(e)(2)(B) (2000). In his informal appellate brief, Tiffer does
not address the district court=s ruling that he failed to allege
facts setting forth a claim cognizable in federal court. *
Therefore, Tiffer has waived appellate review of that issue. See
4th Cir. R. 34(b) (AThe Court will limit its review to the issues
raised in the informal brief.@). Accordingly, we affirm the
district court=s order. 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
* We have jurisdiction to consider this appeal because the order of dismissal suggests that no amendment to the complaint could cure the defects in Tiffer=s case. See Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392,
10 F.3d 1064, 1066(4th Cir. 1993).
2
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished