Karen Williams v. Alicia Smith

USCA4 Appeal: 25-2465 Doc: 12 Filed: 04/27/2026 Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 25-2465

KAREN WILLIAMS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. ALICIA SMITH, HCV Specialist of Raleigh Housing Authority; STEPHANIE BECHAM, HCV Specialist Manager of Raleigh Housing Authority, Defendants - Appellees.

No. 25-2467

KAREN WILLIAMS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. ALICIA SMITH, HCV Specialist; STEPHANIE BECHAM, HCV Specialist Manager, Defendants - Appellees.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:24-cv-00674-BO-KS; 5:24-cv-00681-BO- KS) USCA4 Appeal: 25-2465 Doc: 12 Filed: 04/27/2026 Pg: 2 of 3

Submitted: April 23, 2026 Decided: April 27, 2026

Before NIEMEYER, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Karen Williams, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 25-2465 Doc: 12 Filed: 04/27/2026 Pg: 3 of 3

PER CURIAM: In these consolidated appeals, Karen Williams appeals the district court’s orders granting Defendants’ Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(4) and (5) motions and dismissing her consolidated civil actions for failure to effect proper service. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Williams’ informal briefs do not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, she has forfeited appellate review of the court’s orders. * 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.”). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgments. 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

* In the action undergirding appeal No. 25-2467, the district court initially adopted the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissed a portion of Williams’ claims before consolidating the actions. Williams does not challenge this dismissal ruling on appeal.