Filed: Oct. 22, 2003
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-1743 STEPHANIE P. MCCALLUM, Doctor, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus BANK ONE, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CA- 03-1394-CCB) Submitted: August 8, 2003 Decided: October 22, 2003 Before WILLIAMS, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Stephanie P. McCallum, Appellant P
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-1743 STEPHANIE P. MCCALLUM, Doctor, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus BANK ONE, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CA- 03-1394-CCB) Submitted: August 8, 2003 Decided: October 22, 2003 Before WILLIAMS, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Stephanie P. McCallum, Appellant Pr..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-1743
STEPHANIE P. MCCALLUM, Doctor,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
BANK ONE,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CA-
03-1394-CCB)
Submitted: August 8, 2003 Decided: October 22, 2003
Before WILLIAMS, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Stephanie P. McCallum, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Stephanie P. McCallum seeks to appeal the district court’s
order transferring her case to the Northern District of Illinois.
This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28
U.S.C. § 1291 (2000), and certain interlocutory and collateral
orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2000); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v.
Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp.,
337 U.S. 541 (1949). The order
McCallum seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable
interlocutory or collateral order. See TechnoSteel, LLC v. Beers
Constr. Co.,
271 F.3d 151, 154 (4th Cir. 2001); Gower v. Lehman,
799 F.2d 925, 927 (4th Cir. 1986). Accordingly, we dismiss the
appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We deny McCallum’s motions for
transcripts and for a change of venue. 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