UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-1133

DAVID MICHAEL MONTGOMERY, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CONMED, INC., Defendant - Appellee, and JASON BINGHAM, Cpl.; JOHN CARHART, Sgt.; SENIOR TROOPER CLAYCOMB; FRANK FORNOSS, Str.; STRED WINKLER, Senior Trooper; SGT. GALLIGAN; SCOTT PEDERSON; K. R. JENKINS, Officer; JAMIE GROVER, Officer; CHRIS TAYLOR, Tfc.; EDWARD EICHER, Sgt.; TPR BISHOP; THE CARROLL COUNTY JAIL; MR. HARDINGER, Warden; ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY POLICE; STATE POLICE WESTMINSTER, Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Ellen L. Hollander, District Judge. (1:13-cv-00930-ELH)

Submitted: February 17, 2017 Decided: February 24, 2017

Before AGEE, DIAZ, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

David Michael Montgomery, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Althauser, Megan Green Anderson, Eric Matthew Rigatuso, ECCLESTON & WOLF, PC, Hanover, Maryland for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: David Michael Montgomery appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of Defendant Conmed, Inc., on Montgomery’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Montgomery’s informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, Montgomery has forfeited appellate review of the court’s order. 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 deny Montgomery’s motions for appointment of counsel and affirm the district court’s judgment.

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