Eugene Cory Dingle v. Leslie Armstrong

USCA4 Appeal: 24-2080 Doc: 18 Filed: 03/03/2025 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 24-2080 EUGENE DINGLE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. LESLIE ARMSTRONG, Guardian Ad Litem of Dorchester County Family Court in her individual and official capacity; CANDICE LOREAL STERLING; SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DIVISION; DORCHESTER COUNTY FAMILY COURT, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Bruce H. Hendricks, District Judge. (2:23-cv-04141-BHH) Submitted: January 17, 2025 Decided: March 3, 2025 Before KING and BERNER, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Eugene Dingle, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 24-2080 Doc: 18 Filed: 03/03/2025 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Eugene Dingle appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing without prejudice Dingle’s civil complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and as frivolous, as well as the court’s order denying Dingle’s motions for reconsideration. Limiting our review of the record to the issues raised in Dingle’s informal brief, we have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b); see also 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 deny Dingle’s pending motions and affirm the district court’s orders. Dingle v. Armstrong, No. 2:23-cv-04141-BHH (D.S.C. Aug. 29, 2024; Oct. 8, 2024). 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