James Roudabush, Jr. v. Theodore Nelson

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 2:13-cv-00641-RBS-DEM Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999738481]. Mailed to: appellant. [15-7584]

Appeal: 15-7584

Doc: 11

Filed: 01/20/2016

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-7584

JAMES LESTER ROUDABUSH, JR.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
THEODORE C. NELSON, SA, U.S. Department of State; JASON
CALLAHAN,
Detective,
Prince
William
County
Police
Department; STEPHAN HUDSON, Chief, Prince William Police
Department;
REBECCA
THATCHER,
Assistant
Commonwealth
Attorney; JOHN/JANE DOE, Prince William County Police
Department, Evidence Sect. Director; CHRIS FELDMAN,
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk.
Rebecca Beach Smith, Chief
District Judge. (2:13-cv-00641-RBS-DEM)

Submitted:

January 14, 2016

Decided:

January 20, 2016

Before AGEE, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James Lester Roudabush, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.
Mark Anthony
Exley, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-7584

Doc: 11

Filed: 01/20/2016

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
James

Lester

Roudabush,

Jr.,

appeals

from

the

district

court’s October 3, 2014, order dismissing Defendants Feldman,
Thatcher, and Hudson, the court’s July 7, 2015, order granting
Defendant Nelson’s motion for summary judgment, and the court’s
September 2, 2015, order denying his motion for reconsideration,
granting his motion for voluntary dismissal, and dismissing his
action raising claims under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents
of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), and 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 (2012).
On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in
the

Appellant’s

brief.

See

4th

Cir.

R.

34(b).

Because

Roudabush’s informal brief does not proffer specific argument
challenging

the

bases

for

the

district

court’s

dispositions,

Roudabush has forfeited appellate review of the court’s orders.
Accordingly,

we

We dispense

with

contentions

are

affirm
oral

the

district

argument

adequately

because

presented

in

court’s

judgment.

the

facts

and

the

materials

legal
before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

2