Filed: Feb. 16, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-2023 OTIS O. EDWARDS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus TRS STAFFING SOLUTIONS, INCORPORATED; FLUOR ENTERPRISES, INC., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Tommy E. Miller, Magistrate Judge. (2:06-cv-00166-JBF-TE) Submitted: January 19, 2007 Decided: February 16, 2007 Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dism
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-2023 OTIS O. EDWARDS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus TRS STAFFING SOLUTIONS, INCORPORATED; FLUOR ENTERPRISES, INC., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Tommy E. Miller, Magistrate Judge. (2:06-cv-00166-JBF-TE) Submitted: January 19, 2007 Decided: February 16, 2007 Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismi..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-2023
OTIS O. EDWARDS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
TRS STAFFING SOLUTIONS, INCORPORATED; FLUOR
ENTERPRISES, INC.,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Tommy E. Miller, Magistrate
Judge. (2:06-cv-00166-JBF-TE)
Submitted: January 19, 2007 Decided: February 16, 2007
Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Otis O. Edwards, Appellant Pro Se. Ruth Litvin Goodboe,
MCGUIREWOODS, LLP, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Otis O. Edwards seeks to appeal the magistrate judge’s
order imposing sanctions. 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. § 1292 (2000); Fed.
R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp.,
337 U.S.
541 (1949). The order Edwards 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
deny Edwards’ motion for 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 -