USCA4 Appeal: 24-6283 Doc: 9 Filed: 07/30/2024 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 24-6283

JOHN RICHARD NEWSOME, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. REGINALD FLOYD; K. JEFFORDS; C. SPAZIANI, Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence.

R. Bryan Harwell, Senior District Judge. (4:23-cv-03968-RBH)

Submitted: July 25, 2024 Decided: July 30, 2024

Before GREGORY, HARRIS, and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John Richard Newsome, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 24-6283 Doc: 9 Filed: 07/30/2024 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM: John Richard Newsome appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing Newsome’s amended 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B), 1915A(b).

Limiting our review of the record to the issues raised in Newsome’s informal briefs, we find no reversible error. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b); see also 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 affirm the district court’s judgment. Newsome v. Floyd, No. 4:23-cv-03968-RBH (D.S.C. Mar. 18, 2024). 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