UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-1308
REGINALD JONES,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., d/b/a America’s Servicing Company,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. Roger W. Titus, Senior District Judge.
(8:16-cv-00233-RWT)
Submitted: October 13, 2016 Decided: October 17, 2016
Before NIEMEYER, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jon D. Pels, THE PELS LAW FIRM LLC, Bethesda, Maryland, for
Appellant. Russell J. Pope, Justin E. Fine, TREANOR POPE &
HUGHES, P.A., Towson, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Reginald Jones appeals the district court’s order
dismissing his complaint as barred by res judicata. On appeal,
Jones does not challenge this finding; instead, he argues the
merits of his underlying claim.
An appellant must present his “contentions and the reasons
for them, with citations to the authorities and parts of the
record on which the appellant relies.” Fed. R. App. P.
28(a)(8)(A). “Failure to comply with the specific dictates of
this rule with respect to a particular claim triggers
abandonment of that claim on appeal.” Edwards v. City of
Goldsboro, 178 F.3d 231, 241 n.6 (4th Cir. 1999).
Jones has not challenged the district court’s determination
that the doctrine of res judicata bars his claim. Accordingly,
he has abandoned his claim that the district court erred. Thus,
we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Jones
v. Wells Fargo, N.A., No. 8:16-cv-00233-RWT (D. Md. Mar. 7,
2016). 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
2