Supreme Raheem Ackbar v. Michael McCall ( 2018 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 18-6845
SUPREME RAHEEM ACKBAR, a/k/a Ronald Gary,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
MICHAEL MCCALL; SHIRLEY MCCANTS; DONNIE STONEBREAKER;
RAMMARINE JAGLAL; GWENDOLYN T. STOKES; WICLIFFE
MCPHERSON; CHRIS BORGERSRODE; LEE CORRECTIONAL
INSTITUTION,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
Florence. Richard Mark Gergel, District Judge. (4:18-cv-01581-RMG)
Submitted: November 29, 2018 Decided: December 3, 2018
Before MOTZ, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Supreme Raheem Ackbar, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Supreme Raheem Ackbar appeals the district court’s order accepting the
recommendation of the magistrate judge in part and dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983(2012) complaint as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012). Upon review and
having liberally construed Ackbar’s informal brief, we find that he fails to challenge the
bases for the district court’s dismissal with prejudice of his complaint, including its
finding that such dismissal constitutes a strike under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) (2012). We
therefore conclude that he has waived appellate review. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b); Jackson v.
Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“[O]ur review is limited to issues preserved
in [the informal] brief.”).
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for the reasons stated by the district court.
Ackbar v. McCall, No. 4:18-cv-01581-RMG (D.S.C. July 3, 2018). 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.
DISMISSED
2