# Mua v. Board of Education of Prince George's County

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · September 16, 2016 · 668 F. App'x 535

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8680807

## Case

- **Full name:** Josephat MUA v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY/Prince George's County Public Schools Verjeana M. Jacobs, Individually and as Board Chairperson of Prince George's Public Schools Dr. William R. Hite, Jr., Individually and as superintendent Roger C. Thomas, Esquire Synthia J. Shilling Monica Goldson, Individually and as Associates superintendent of Prince George's Public Schools American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, AFSCME Association of Classified Employees American Federation of State, County, Municipal Employees (AFSCME), AFSCME Local 2250 Pierre Dickson, Individually and as agent of the Board of Education of Prince George's County DR Kevin Maxwell, Individually and as superintendent of Prince George's Public Schools Dr. Alvin L. Crawley, Individually and as superintendent Robert J. Gaskin, Individually and Chief Human Resources of Prince George's Public Schools Dr. Lillian M. Lowery Ardia O'Neal Abbey Hairston
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** September 16, 2016
- **Citations:** 668 F. App'x 535
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court
- **Judges:** Agee, Thacker, Traxler
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8680807

## Opinion text

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Josephat Mua appeals the district court’s order dismissing his complaint raising several civil claims against Defendants. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Mua’s informal brief does not challenge the bases for the district court’s disposition, Mua has forfeited appellate review of the district court’s order. See Williams v. Giant Food Inc., 370 F.3d 423 , 430 n.4 (4th Cir. 2004). Accordingly, we deny Mua’s application to proceed in forma pauperis and affirm the district court’s order of dismissal. See Mua v. Bd. of Educ. of Prince George’s Cty., No. 8:15-cv-02249-PJM, 2016 WL 1258469 (D. Md. Mar. 31, 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

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8680807. Public record. Not legal advice.