Filed: Dec. 17, 2007
Latest Update: Feb. 12, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-1642 CHRISTOPHER BERNARD JONES, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PERRY S. LUTHI, Sr.; DESMINE SARDINE; LUTHI MORTGAGE COMPANY, INC.; CAROLINA TAX SERVICE; LUTHI CONSTRUCTION COMPANY; LIBERTY FUNDING; GENERAL FUNDING; PERRY S. LUTHI, Jr.; MARTHA PACE; LORI MURPHY; CAROL A. SIMPSON; IRA HANDY; HANDY MOISTURE & PEST CONTROL; PETE PETERSON; RON PLATT; MARSHA PLATT; SONNY NINAN; MICHAEL DOE; DEE DEE DOE; KIM DOE, Defendants - Appel
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-1642 CHRISTOPHER BERNARD JONES, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PERRY S. LUTHI, Sr.; DESMINE SARDINE; LUTHI MORTGAGE COMPANY, INC.; CAROLINA TAX SERVICE; LUTHI CONSTRUCTION COMPANY; LIBERTY FUNDING; GENERAL FUNDING; PERRY S. LUTHI, Jr.; MARTHA PACE; LORI MURPHY; CAROL A. SIMPSON; IRA HANDY; HANDY MOISTURE & PEST CONTROL; PETE PETERSON; RON PLATT; MARSHA PLATT; SONNY NINAN; MICHAEL DOE; DEE DEE DOE; KIM DOE, Defendants - Appell..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-1642
CHRISTOPHER BERNARD JONES,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
PERRY S. LUTHI, Sr.; DESMINE SARDINE; LUTHI
MORTGAGE COMPANY, INC.; CAROLINA TAX SERVICE;
LUTHI CONSTRUCTION COMPANY; LIBERTY FUNDING;
GENERAL FUNDING; PERRY S. LUTHI, Jr.; MARTHA
PACE; LORI MURPHY; CAROL A. SIMPSON; IRA
HANDY; HANDY MOISTURE & PEST CONTROL; PETE
PETERSON; RON PLATT; MARSHA PLATT; SONNY
NINAN; MICHAEL DOE; DEE DEE DOE; KIM DOE,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 07-1691
CHRISTOPHER BERNARD JONES,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
PERRY S. LUTHI, SR.; DESMINE SARDINE; LUTHI
MORTGAGE COMPANY, INC.; CAROLINA TAX SERVICE;
LUTHI CONSTRUCTION COMPANY; LIBERTY FUNDING;
GENERAL FUNDING; PERRY S. LUTHI, JR.; MARTHA
PACE; LORI MURPHY; CAROL A. SIMPSON; IRA
HANDY; HANDY MOISTURE & PEST; PETE PETERSON;
RON PLATT; MARSHA PLATT; SONNY NINAN; MICHAEL
DOE; DEE DEE DOE; KIM DOE,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 07-1937
CHRISTOPHER BERNARD JONES,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
PERRY S. LUTHI, Sr.; DESMINE SARDINE; LUTHI
MORTGAGE COMPANY, INC.; CAROLINA TAX SERVICE;
LUTHI CONSTRUCTION COMPANY; LIBERTY FUNDING;
GENERAL FUNDING; PERRY S. LUTHI, Jr.; MARTHA
PACE; LORI MURPHY; CAROL A. SIMPSON; IRA
HANDY; HANDY MOISTURE & PEST CONTROL; PETE
PETERSON; RON PLATT; MARSHA PLATT; SONNY
NINAN; MICHAEL DOE; DEE DEE DOE; KIM DOE,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Greenville. Patrick Michael Duffy, District
Judge. (6:06-cv-02202-PMD)
Submitted: December 13, 2007 Decided: December 17, 2007
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Christopher Bernard Jones, Appellant Pro Se. Melvin Hutson, MELVIN
HUTSON, PA, Greenville, South Carolina; Carol A. Simpson,
Greenville, South Carolina; Ira Handy, Taylors, South Carolina; Ron
- 2 -
Platt, Greenville, South Carolina; Marsha Platt, Greenville, South
Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 3 -
PER CURIAM:
Christopher Bernard Jones seeks to appeal the district
court’s orders denying his motion to reconsider the court’s order
requiring him to comply with the service requirements of Fed. R.
Civ. P. 5; denying his motion to amend the complaint; and granting
a defendant’s motion for an extension of time to answer Plaintiff’s
interrogatories and produce documents. 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 orders Jones seeks to appeal are
neither final orders nor appealable interlocutory or collateral
orders. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeals for lack of
jurisdiction. We deny Jones’ motions to stay the district court
proceedings, for an injunction and restraining order, to waive the
requirement to file a certificate of service, and for emergency
relief for order of protection; and also deny Jones’ petition for
emergency relief. 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
- 4 -