Albert Anderson v. McMillian

USCA4 Appeal: 24-6495 Doc: 21 Filed: 12/30/2025 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 24-6495 ALBERT ANDERSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MCMILLIAN, Medical Provider; ERIC DYE, Warden; JEFFREY DUNCAN, Assistant Warden; ALEXANDER CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, Prison; JANCY M. JOHNSON, Assistant Unit Manager; COOK, Correctional Officer; COX, Nurse; SOUTHERN HEALTH PARTNERS; DULA, Correction Officer; JANE DOE, Nurse; TODD ISHEE, Commissioner; JOHN DOE, Custody Operations; JOHN DOE 1, Correction Officer; JOHN DOE, Associate Warden for Programs; JOHN DOE 2, Administrative Services Manager; JOHN DOE 2, Correction Officer; GOINS, Sergeant; JANE DOE 1, Associate Warden for Program; JANE DOE 2, Administrative Services Manager, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Kenneth D. Bell, District Judge. (5:24-cv-00081-KDB) Submitted: December 23, 2025 Decided: December 30, 2025 Before WILKINSON and RUSHING, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. USCA4 Appeal: 24-6495 Doc: 21 Filed: 12/30/2025 Pg: 2 of 3 Albert Anderson, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 USCA4 Appeal: 24-6495 Doc: 21 Filed: 12/30/2025 Pg: 3 of 3 PER CURIAM: Albert Anderson appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action without prejudice on the grounds that it was duplicative of another action Anderson had pending before the district court. ∗ On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Anderson’s informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, he has forfeited appellate review of the court’s order. See Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“The informal brief is an important document; under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited to issues preserved in that brief.”). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. Anderson v. McMillian, No. 5:24-cv-00081-KDB (W.D.N.C. Apr. 29, 2024). Anderson’s motion to consolidate cases is denied. 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 ∗ The district court’s order is a final, appealable order because the court did not grant Anderson leave to amend his complaint. Britt v. DeJoy, 45 F.4th 790, 796 (4th Cir. 2022) (en banc) (order). 3