Herbert Clark, III, appeals the district courts order accepting the magistrate judges recommendation and dismissing Clarks Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).
*
We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Clark v. McCarthy, No. 5:19-cv-00184-FL, 2020 WL 1623973 (E.D.N.C. Apr. 2, 2020). 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
FOOTNOTES
FOOTNOTE
. Clark has waived review of the district courts rejection of his claim for independent action by failing to address the courts ruling on that claim in his informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b).
PER CURIAM:
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.