Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Sundari K. Prasad appeals the district court’s order dismissing as frivolous Pra-sad’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012). civil rights action becauseshe failed to allege facts establishing that any of the named Defendants were acting under color of state law. On appeal, we confine our review to the, issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Prasad does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition in her informal brief. Thus, Prasad has forfeited appellate review of the court’s order. See Williams v. Giant Food Inc., 370 F.3d 423, 430 n.4 (4th Cir. 2004). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. 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
The district court dismissed this action after conducting frivolity review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) (2012).