Spinks v. Linthicum

Opinion

Case: 25-50811 Document: 46-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/11/2026

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit

No. 25-50811 FILED Summary Calendar August 11, 2026 ____________ Lyle W. Cayce Clerk

Nancy Jackson Spinks,

Plaintiff—Appellant,

versus

Lannette Linthicum, Director of Health Services Division at TDCJ; Ann Best, UTMB Practice Manager at Hilltop Unit Infirmary; Nurse Yvonne Gasigwa, Provider at UTMB with Hilltop Unit Infirmary; John or Jane Doe, Unknown LVNS at UTMB with Hilltop Unit Infirmary; John or Jane Doe No. 2, Executive Director of Clinical Services for UTMB; Andrea Lozada, Senior Warden for TDCJ Mountainview/Hilltop Complex; John or Jane Doe No. 3, Executive Medical Director of Facility Operations for UTMB; Mary Tatum,

Defendants—Appellees.

______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 6:24-CV-408

______________________________

Before Higginbotham, Jones, and Oldham, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam: *

*

This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

Case: 25-50811 Document: 46-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/11/2026

No. 25-50811

Nancy Jackson Spinks, proceeding pro se, appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the defendants and the denial of her motions to alter or amend. Although pro se filings are afforded liberal construction, even pro se litigants must brief arguments in order to preserve them. Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 225 (5th Cir. 1993). By failing to address or identify any error in the district court’s grant of the defendants’ motion for summary judgment, Spinks abandoned any possible challenge to the dismissal of her complaint. See Brinkmann v. Dallas Cnty. Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987). To the extent that Spinks raises arguments in her reply brief, these arguments are not properly before the court as the failure to raise an argument in the opening brief constitutes waiver of that argument. See United States v. Fernandez, 48 F.4th 405, 412 (5th Cir. 2022).

In light of the foregoing, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.