Filed: Aug. 23, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-6475 ROBERT ANDREW BARTLETT, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. PAULA SMITH; BRAD PERRITT; LARRY THOMPSON; JAMESE SMITH; DIEDRE HARRELSON; PATSY CHAVIS; NURSE PALMER, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:18-ct-03124-FL) Submitted: August 20, 2019 Decided: August 23, 2019 Before FLOYD and RUSHING, Circui
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-6475 ROBERT ANDREW BARTLETT, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. PAULA SMITH; BRAD PERRITT; LARRY THOMPSON; JAMESE SMITH; DIEDRE HARRELSON; PATSY CHAVIS; NURSE PALMER, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:18-ct-03124-FL) Submitted: August 20, 2019 Decided: August 23, 2019 Before FLOYD and RUSHING, Circuit..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 19-6475
ROBERT ANDREW BARTLETT, SR.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
PAULA SMITH; BRAD PERRITT; LARRY THOMPSON; JAMESE SMITH;
DIEDRE HARRELSON; PATSY CHAVIS; NURSE PALMER,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:18-ct-03124-FL)
Submitted: August 20, 2019 Decided: August 23, 2019
Before FLOYD and RUSHING, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Robert Andrew Bartlett, Sr., Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Robert Andrew Bartlett, Sr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing
some, but not all, of his claims in his civil action. This court may exercise jurisdiction only
over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2012), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders,
28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2012); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp.,
337 U.S. 541, 545-46 (1949). The order Bartlett 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 this court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
DISMISSED
2