Filed: Oct. 21, 2009
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-7037 HUGH EPPS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MICHAEL MOORE, Government Attorney, Eastern District Court of VA; UNKNOWN, DEA Officer; JAMES OXFORD, DEA Officer, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. M. Hannah Lauck, Magistrate Judge. (3:09-cv-00039-JRS) Submitted: October 15, 2009 Decided: October 21, 2009 Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit J
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-7037 HUGH EPPS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MICHAEL MOORE, Government Attorney, Eastern District Court of VA; UNKNOWN, DEA Officer; JAMES OXFORD, DEA Officer, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. M. Hannah Lauck, Magistrate Judge. (3:09-cv-00039-JRS) Submitted: October 15, 2009 Decided: October 21, 2009 Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Ju..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-7037
HUGH EPPS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
MICHAEL MOORE, Government Attorney, Eastern District Court
of VA; UNKNOWN, DEA Officer; JAMES OXFORD, DEA Officer,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. M. Hannah Lauck, Magistrate
Judge. (3:09-cv-00039-JRS)
Submitted: October 15, 2009 Decided: October 21, 2009
Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Hugh Epps, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Hugh Epps seeks to appeal a magistrate judge’s order
denying without prejudice his “Motion of Filing a Complaint
under Civil Rights Act 42 U.S.C. § 1983.” This court may
exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291
(2006), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28
U.S.C. § 1292 (2006); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial
Indus. Loan Corp.,
337 U.S. 541 (1949). The order Epps seeks to
appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory
or collateral order. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for
lack of jurisdiction. We dispense with oral argument because
the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
materials before the court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
DISMISSED
2