Filed: Mar. 27, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-2196 JOHN D. BLACK, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus THE CITY OF NEWARK, A Municipal Corporation of the State of New Jersey, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. Wallace W. Dixon, Magistrate Judge. (1:06-cv-00534-UA-WWD) Submitted: March 22, 2007 Decided: March 27, 2007 Before WIDENER and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-2196 JOHN D. BLACK, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus THE CITY OF NEWARK, A Municipal Corporation of the State of New Jersey, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. Wallace W. Dixon, Magistrate Judge. (1:06-cv-00534-UA-WWD) Submitted: March 22, 2007 Decided: March 27, 2007 Before WIDENER and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit J..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-2196
JOHN D. BLACK,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
THE CITY OF NEWARK, A Municipal Corporation of
the State of New Jersey,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Durham. Wallace W. Dixon,
Magistrate Judge. (1:06-cv-00534-UA-WWD)
Submitted: March 22, 2007 Decided: March 27, 2007
Before WIDENER and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
John D. Black, Appellant Pro Se. Patricia M. Lewis, CITY OF NEWARK
DEPARTMENT OF LAW, Newark, New Jersey, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
John D. Black seeks to appeal the magistrate judge’s
order finding the deed he attempted to file to be a deficient
filing. 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 Black seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an
appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we deny
leave to proceed in forma pauperis and 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 -