Filed: Jun. 05, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 26, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-1186 LOURDES IGLESIAS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. WAL-MART STORES, INCORPORATED, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Mark S. Davis, District Judge. (2:11-cv-00341-MSD-FBS) Submitted: May 31, 2012 Decided: June 5, 2012 Before KING, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lourdes Iglesias, Appellant Pro Se. U
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-1186 LOURDES IGLESIAS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. WAL-MART STORES, INCORPORATED, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Mark S. Davis, District Judge. (2:11-cv-00341-MSD-FBS) Submitted: May 31, 2012 Decided: June 5, 2012 Before KING, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lourdes Iglesias, Appellant Pro Se. Un..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-1186
LOURDES IGLESIAS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
WAL-MART STORES, INCORPORATED,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Mark S. Davis, District
Judge. (2:11-cv-00341-MSD-FBS)
Submitted: May 31, 2012 Decided: June 5, 2012
Before KING, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Lourdes Iglesias, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Lourdes Iglesias seeks to appeal the district court’s
order dismissing, without prejudice, her civil action against
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., and denying her motion for
reconsideration. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over
final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2006), and certain interlocutory
and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2006); Fed. R. Civ. P.
54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp.,
337 U.S. 541, 545-
46 (1949). The orders Iglesias seeks to appeal are neither
final orders nor appealable interlocutory or collateral orders.
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