PER CURIAM:
Rasheed Oshodi, proceeding pro se, appeals the district court’s denial of his motion for sanctions and grant of Defendant’s motion for summary judgment in an action alleging race and disability discrimination, failure to accommodate, retaliation, and interference, under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. § 12112; Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-2(a)(l), 2000e-3(a); 42 U.S.C. § 1981; the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 794; and the Family and Medical Leave Act, 29 U.S.C. § 2615.
Although we construe pro se briefs liberally, it is not the court’s place to argue the appellant’s case for him. GJR Investments Inc. v. County of Escambia, Fla., 132 F.3d 1359, 1369 (11th Cir.1998), overruled on other grounds as recognized in Randall v. Scott, 610 F.3d 701, 709 (11th Cir.2010). A pro se litigant who offers no substantive argument on an issue in his brief abandons the issue on appeal. See Timson v. Sampson, 518 F.3d 870, 874 (11th Cir.2008) (per curiam).
Oshodi has abandoned all of his claims on appeal by failing to offer any legal arguments in support of his position. Furthermore, there is no error in the district court’s holding.
AFFIRMED.