UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-1370
MELANIE SMITH; EMANUEL SMITH, et al Mortgage Rescission
Petitioners and Crime Victims’ Rights Claimants,
Plaintiffs – Appellants,
v.
FIRST TENNESSEE BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION; BANK OF NEW YORK
MELLON, f/k/a Bank of New York; METLIFE HOME LOANS;
NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC; HUGH GREEN, The Atlantic Law
Group, LLC; KRISTINA J. LONGO, & Ober, Kaler, Grimes &
Shriver; FAYE W. MITCHELL, and the Chesapeake City Circuit
Court Office Staff,
Defendants – Appellees,
and
TINA MCDANIEL AND NECTAR PROJECTS, INCORPORATED; FIRST
HORIZON HOME LOAN CORPORATION, (Now Defunct/Expired),
Defendants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior
District Judge. (2:15-cv-00495-RGD-LRL)
Submitted: August 18, 2016 Decided: August 22, 2016
Before WILKINSON, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Melanie Smith, Emanuel Smith, Appellants Pro Se. Katherine Grace
Mims Crocker, MCGUIREWOODS, LLP, Richmond, Virginia; Andrew
Francis Lopez, MCGUIREWOODS, LLP, Charlotte, North Carolina;
Dean L. Robinson, ATLANTIC LAW GROUP, LLC, Leesburg, Virginia;
E. Jon Steren, OBER KALER GRIMES & SHRIVER, PC, Washington,
D.C.; David Brandt Oakley, POOLE BROOKE PLUMLEE PC, Virginia
Beach, Virginia; Adam Michael Carroll, WOLCOTT RIVERS & GATES,
Virginia Beach, Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
PER CURIAM:
Melanie and Emanuel Smith appeal the district court’s
orders dismissing their civil case. On appeal, we confine our
review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th
Cir. R. 34(b). Because the Smiths’ informal brief does not
challenge the bases for the district court’s disposition, they
have forfeited appellate review of the court’s orders.
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. 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.
AFFIRMED
3