Juanita Perez Hernandez and Daniel Montes, Jr. (collectively, Appellants), have appealed, pro se, the district court’s summary-judgment dismissal of their civil rights lawsuit. The Appellants acknowledge that the district court correctly held that 42 U.S.C. § 1983 does not provide a jurisdictional basis for their claims, but they argue that they should have been given an opportunity to amend their complaint to state a valid cause of action. They further argue that the entry of summary judgment was error because of the existence of unidentified genuine issues of material fact relative to the validity of their claims.

*867 Although this court applies less stringent standards to parties proceeding pro se than to litigants, pro se parties must still brief the issues and reasonably comply with the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 28. Grant v. Cuellar, 59 F.3d 523, 524 (5th Cir. 1995). The Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure require the parties to provide references to the page number of the record to support statements of fact. Fed. R.App. P. 28(a)(7) and (9)(A) (2002); 5th Cir. R. 28.2.3; Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224 (5th Cir. 1993). As the Appellants have failed to comply with these requirements, we do not consider their arguments. The appeal is frivolous, and it is dismissed. Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983); 5th Cir. R. 42.2.

APPEAL DISMISSED.