Jennifer Bowles v. Kilolo Kijakazi, No. 22-2119 (4th Cir. 2023)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 22-2119 JENNIFER BOWLES, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. William L. Osteen, Jr., District Judge. (1:21-cv-00243-WO-JLW) Submitted: October 30, 2023 Decided: November 14, 2023 Before GREGORY and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jennifer Bowles, Appellant Pro Se. Kenneth DiVito, Assistant Regional Counsel, David Nathaniel Mervis, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Jennifer Bowles appeals the district court’s order and judgment adopting the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, granting the Commissioner’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, and affirming the Commissioner’s decision denying disability insurance benefits. We generally do not consider issues raised for the first time on appeal, Hicks v. Ferreyra, 965 F.3d 302, 310 (4th Cir. 2020), and confine our review to the issues raised in the informal brief, see 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Many of the issues Bowles raises in her informal brief were not raised in the district court. And after reviewing the remainder of Bowles’ informal brief, we conclude that she has forfeited appellate review of the district court’s order by not raising any issues challenging the district court’s findings or analysis. Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (limiting our review to issues preserved in informal brief). Accordingly, we affirm the court’s order and 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 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.