Filed: May 01, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 26, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-6067 LARRY WILLIAMS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. OFFICER ROBERTSON; WARDEN MCCALL; MAJOR BUSH; CAROLINE LINDSEY, Staff Attorney; LT. WILLIAMS; LT. EARL; CAPT. ABSTEN; CAPT. TICH; DEBRA BARNWELL; MR. JON OZMINT, Director; STEPHEN R. CLAYTON, Warden, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Margaret B. Seymour, Chief District Judge. (3:08-cv-03867-MBS)
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-6067 LARRY WILLIAMS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. OFFICER ROBERTSON; WARDEN MCCALL; MAJOR BUSH; CAROLINE LINDSEY, Staff Attorney; LT. WILLIAMS; LT. EARL; CAPT. ABSTEN; CAPT. TICH; DEBRA BARNWELL; MR. JON OZMINT, Director; STEPHEN R. CLAYTON, Warden, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Margaret B. Seymour, Chief District Judge. (3:08-cv-03867-MBS) ..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-6067
LARRY WILLIAMS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
OFFICER ROBERTSON; WARDEN MCCALL; MAJOR BUSH; CAROLINE
LINDSEY, Staff Attorney; LT. WILLIAMS; LT. EARL; CAPT.
ABSTEN; CAPT. TICH; DEBRA BARNWELL; MR. JON OZMINT,
Director; STEPHEN R. CLAYTON, Warden,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Columbia. Margaret B. Seymour, Chief
District Judge. (3:08-cv-03867-MBS)
Submitted: April 26, 2012 Decided: May 1, 2012
Before GREGORY, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Larry Williams, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Larry Williams seeks to appeal the district court’s
text order in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) action, which denied
Williams’ motion for default judgment against Defendants. 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, 545-46 (1949). The
order Williams 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