Filed: Nov. 12, 2008
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-1628 DEBRO SIDDIQ ABDUL-AKBAR, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. GARY SAVAGE; ANTHONY COATES; CORNELIOUS HARRISON; ROBERT TELLER; KIMBERLY HORSLEY; SHARON LA RHUE; MIKE DAVIS; JOHN R. KAYE; HOUSING AUTHORITY OF BALTIMORE; AFSCME LOCAL 647, and all other Persons who are found to have a hidden hand in the acts described within, et al, Defendants – Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, a
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-1628 DEBRO SIDDIQ ABDUL-AKBAR, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. GARY SAVAGE; ANTHONY COATES; CORNELIOUS HARRISON; ROBERT TELLER; KIMBERLY HORSLEY; SHARON LA RHUE; MIKE DAVIS; JOHN R. KAYE; HOUSING AUTHORITY OF BALTIMORE; AFSCME LOCAL 647, and all other Persons who are found to have a hidden hand in the acts described within, et al, Defendants – Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-1628
DEBRO SIDDIQ ABDUL-AKBAR,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
GARY SAVAGE; ANTHONY COATES; CORNELIOUS HARRISON; ROBERT
TELLER; KIMBERLY HORSLEY; SHARON LA RHUE; MIKE DAVIS; JOHN
R. KAYE; HOUSING AUTHORITY OF BALTIMORE; AFSCME LOCAL 647,
and all other Persons who are found to have a hidden hand in
the acts described within, et al,
Defendants – Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, Senior District
Judge. (1:08-cv-00542-WMN)
Submitted: October 14, 2008 Decided: November 12, 2008
Before MOTZ, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Debro Siddiq Abdul-Akbar, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Debro Siddiq Abdul-Akbar seeks to appeal the district
court’s order dismissing his complaint without prejudice. 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
Abdul-Akbar seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an
appealable interlocutory or collateral order. See Domino Sugar
Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392,
10 F.3d 1064, 1066 (4th
Cir. 1993). Accordingly, we deny his motion for appointment of
counsel 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