UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 20-2182

LONNIE B. BARBEE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. ISOTHERMAL COMMUNITY COLLEGE; RUSSELL WICKER; DAVID LIBERA; THAD HARRILL; STEPHEN MATHENY; WALTER DALTON; SALONIA THORN, Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Martin K. Reidinger, Chief District Judge. (1:18-cv-00267-MR-WCM)

Submitted: December 6, 2021 Decided: January 19, 2022

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, KING, Circuit Judge, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lonnie B. Barbee, Appellant Pro Se. Matthew J. Gilley, Brian N. McCracken, FORD & HARRISON LLP, Spartanburg, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: Lonnie B. Barbee appeals the district court’s order granting Defendants’ motion for summary judgment and dismissing his employment discrimination complaint. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b).

Construing his informal brief liberally, see Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007) (stating that pro se filings should be liberally construed), Barbee challenges only the district court’s disposition of his wrongful termination age discrimination claim. Because Barbee does not challenge the bases for the district court’s disposition of his other claims, he has forfeited appellate review of all other claims. 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.”).

We review a district court’s decision to grant summary judgment de novo. See Seremeth v. Bd. of Cnty. Comm’rs Frederick Cnty., 673 F.3d 333, 336 (4th Cir. 2012). Our review of the record leads us to conclude that the district court did not err in denying Barbee’s age discrimination claim. Accordingly, we affirm the denial of that claim for the reasons stated by the district court. Barbee v. Isothermal Cmty. Coll., No. 1:18-cv-00267- MR-WCM (W.D.N.C. Oct. 19, 2020). We deny Barbee’s request for appointment of counsel and 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