Roger Persinger, Jr. v. Northern Regional Jail, No. 15-7284 (4th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-7284 ROGER DALE PERSINGER, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. NORTHERN REGIONAL JAIL AND CORRECTIONAL FACILITY; DALE GRIFFITH, Unit Manager (NCF), sued in individual capacity; JAMES RUBENSTEIN, Commissioner Division of Corrections, sued in individual capacity; SYNTHIA GARDNER, Central Office Grievance Review, sued in individual capacity; DIANA MILLS, Counselor NNCF, sued in individual capacity; NANCY NINE, Counselor (NCF), sued in individual capacity; KAREN PSZCZOLKOWSKI, Warden (NCF), sued in individual capacity; BRANDY MILLER, Associate Warden of Programs, sued in individual capacity; JANE/JOHN DOE, Unknown Defendants Through Discovery, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., Senior District Judge. (5:14-cv-00119-FPS-JSK) Submitted: November 17, 2015 Decided: November 20, 2015 Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Roger Dale Persinger, Jr., Barchiesi, LAW OFFICES OF Appellant Pro Se. BERNARD J. KELLY, John Eric Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Roger Dale Persinger, Jr., appeals the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. appeal, we confine Appellant’s brief. our review to the issues See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). raised in On the Here, the district court dismissed the complaint based on Persinger’s failure to exhaust administrative remedies, but Persinger does not meaningfully address exhaustion in his informal brief on appeal. Because Persinger’s informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, Persinger has forfeited appellate review of the court’s order. the district court’s judgment. Accordingly, we affirm 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 3
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.
