UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-8258
FRANK SKINNER,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; BUREAU OF PRISONS; HARLEY LAPIN,
Director; RAMIREZ, Regional Director; K. WHITE, Mid-Atlantic
Region Director; G. MALDONADO, USP-Atlanta Warden; A. W.
YARK; P. A.M. ITTAYEM; R. CRAIG, Counselor; AL HAYNES,
USP-Hazelton Warden; V. PURI, Health Care Administrator; D.
BOYLES, R.N.; R. MCFADDEN, Western Region Director; T. A.
BANKS, FCI Victorville Warden; HEALTH SERVICE ADMINISTRATOR
DEVEZA; B. BARTON, M.D.; DAVID ROBERTSON, President/CEO
Monogalia General Hospital,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Elkins. Robert E. Maxwell, Senior
District Judge. (2:07-cv-00077-REM-JES)
Submitted: March 30, 2010 Decided: April 5, 2010
Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Frank Skinner, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolph Contreras, John F.
Henault, Jr., Assistant United States Attorneys, Washington,
D.C.; William E. Coonan, Assistant United States Attorney,
Fairview Heights, Illinois; Sharon Lynn Potter, OFFICE OF THE
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
PER CURIAM:
Frank Skinner appeals the district court’s order
adopting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
dismissing his complaint pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named
Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), and the
Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2671-2680 (2006), with
prejudice in part and without prejudice in part. On appeal, we
confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s
Brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Skinner’s brief fails to
challenge the district court’s dispositive conclusions regarding
the lack of personal jurisdiction over some defendants; his
failure to state a claim against the institutional defendants;
the merits of his Bivens action; his failure to exhaust
administrative remedies; and his compliance with state law for
his Federal Tort Claims Act claims. We therefore find Skinner
has forfeited appellate review. Accordingly, we affirm the
district court’s order and deny Skinner’s motion to appoint
counsel. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
before the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED
3