Background
Matthew Alward, proceeding pro se, filed a second amended complaint pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics in the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia. The district court accepted the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissed the complaint under Section nineteen hundred fifteen A of Title twenty-eight of the United States Code.
The court’s reasoning
The Court of Appeals confined its review to the issues raised in the appellant’s informal brief. The appellant primarily raised new claims regarding retaliatory transfer and mistreatment but did not challenge the specific legal bases for the district court’s dismissal. Under Fourth Circuit rules, the informal brief limits review to issues preserved therein. Because the appellant failed to challenge the bases for the disposition, he forfeited appellate review of the order. The court further discerned no reversible error in the district court’s acceptance of the magistrate judge’s findings.
What it means going forward
The decision reinforces that pro se litigants must strictly adhere to procedural rules regarding informal briefs to preserve issues for appeal, as failure to challenge the basis of a lower court’s decision results in forfeiture of review.