Virginia Goforth v. Harley Lappin

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Virginia Arlene Goforth appeals the district court’s orders accepting the recommendations of the magistrate judge and denying relief on her complaint filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971), and the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error in the district court’s rejection of Goforth’s FTCA claim. Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis and affirm the disposition of the FTCA claim for the reasons stated by the district court. Goforth v. Lappin, No. 1:09-cv-00003 (S.D.W.Va. Aug. 14, 2015).

Turning to Goforth’s Bivens claims, we confine our review on appeal to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Goforth’s informal brief does not challenge the bases for the district court’s disposition of her Bivens claims — namely, that she failed to properly serve the individual defendants and, in any event, that she failed to demonstrate deliberate indifference to her serious medical needs. Thus, Goforth has forfeited appellate review of the court’s order. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s denial of Goforth’s Bivens claims.

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.