Shanell Y. Royal appeals the district courts orders dismissing her civil actions. To the extent Royal contests the district courts dismissal of the claims against Defendant Shannon Seifert for failure to effect service, we have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm this decision for the reasons stated by the district court. Royal v. Univ. of Md., No. 1:19-cv-02826-CCB (D. Md. Apr. 13, 2020).
As to the remainder of these consolidated appeals, we confine our review to the issues raised in the informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because, apart from the service of process issue, Royals informal briefs do not challenge the bases for the district courts disposition, she has forfeited appellate review of the courts orders. See Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“The informal brief is an important document; under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited to issues preserved in that brief.”).
Accordingly, we affirm the district courts orders. 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
PER CURIAM:
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.