Robert DuBose, Texas prisoner # 01880528, sued five correctional officers alleging 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims arising from a use of force. The district court granted summary judgment for the defendants on the basis of qualified immunity and the absence of any genuine issue of material fact that any defendant had violated DuBose’s Eighth Amendment rights. DuBose appeals.

We review a summary judgment de novo. See, e.g., Mason v. Lafayette City-Parish Consol. Gov’t, 806 F.3d 268, 274 (5th Cir. 2015). To preserve an issue for review, the appellant must adequately brief it and “.engage the issue on the basis of binding precedent.” See United States v. Scroggins, 599 F.3d 433, 446-47 & n.8 (5th Cir. 2010); see also Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(8). DuBose’s perfunctory counseled brief is not entitled to liberal construction, see Beasley v. McCotter, 798 F.2d 116, 118 (5th Cir. 1986), and it fails to meet this court’s standards for appellate briefing and fails properly to raise any issue for appeal. See Scroggins, 599 F.3d at 446-47.

AFFIRMED.