[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FILED
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
________________________ ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
JAN 31, 2007
No. 06-13787 THOMAS K. KAHN
Non-Argument Calendar CLERK
________________________
D. C. Docket No. 05-00900-CV-CAM-1
ROBERT L. REHBERGER,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
WILLIAM (HAL) CRAIG,
Flint Circuit Superior Court Judge,
TOMMY K. FLOYD,
Flint Circuit District Attorney, et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Georgia
_________________________
(January 31, 2007)
Before BIRCH, BLACK and PRYOR, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Robert L. Rehberger, a pro se state prisoner, appeals the district court’s
denial of his Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) motion to vacate and his
connected motion for leave to file for a three-judge panel, related to his 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 civil rights action. On appeal, Rehberger only argues the merits of the
underlying claims raised in his original § 1983 action.
Litigants who fail to raise issues on appeal have abandoned those issues.
Allstate Ins. Co. v. Swann, 27 F.3d 1539, 1542 (11th Cir. 1994). However, briefs
should be read liberally to ascertain the issues raised. Id.
Rehberger has failed to present any argument the district court abused its
discretion in denying his Rule 60(b) motion or in denying his motion for leave to
file for a three-judge panel, therefore, he has abandoned these claims. Id. at 1542.
Even construing Rehberger’s brief liberally as implicit arguments against the
denial of his Rule 60(b) motion, the district court did not abuse its discretion
because we previously affirmed the order he sought to vacate. Accordingly,
because the arguments Rehberger raises are not properly before us and he has
abandoned all other arguments, we affirm the district court’s order.
AFFIRMED.
2