Roman Tiffer v. Worker's Compensation

Filing 920081024


Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-1852 ROMAN TIFFER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. WORKER=S COMPENSATION; LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE CORPORATION; ABACUS CORPORATION; THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR BALTIMORE CITY, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, District Judge. (1:08cv-01417-JFM) Submitted: October 21, 2008 Decided: October 24, 2008 Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Roman Tiffer, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Roman Tiffer appeals the district court=s order dismissing without prejudice his complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 1915(e)(2)(B) (2000). In his informal appellate brief, Tiffer does not address the district court=s ruling that he failed to allege facts setting forth a claim cognizable in federal court. * See Therefore, Tiffer has waived appellate review of that issue. 4th Cir. R. 34(b) (AThe Court will limit its review to the issues raised in the informal brief.@). district court=s order. facts and legal before Accordingly, we affirm the We dispense with oral argument because the are and adequately argument presented not in aid the the contentions the court materials would decisional process. AFFIRMED We have jurisdiction to consider this appeal because the order of dismissal suggests that no amendment to the complaint could cure the defects in Tiffer=s case. See Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066 (4th Cir. 1993). 2 *

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?