Filed: May 23, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-6324 MORRIS SPEIGHT-BEY, Petitioner - Appellant, v. CHARLES WILLIAMS, Warden, Alien Property Custodian, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, District Judge. (1:15-cv-00177-IMK-JES) Submitted: May 18, 2016 Decided: May 23, 2016 Before SHEDD, DIAZ, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-6324 MORRIS SPEIGHT-BEY, Petitioner - Appellant, v. CHARLES WILLIAMS, Warden, Alien Property Custodian, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, District Judge. (1:15-cv-00177-IMK-JES) Submitted: May 18, 2016 Decided: May 23, 2016 Before SHEDD, DIAZ, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. M..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-6324
MORRIS SPEIGHT-BEY,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
CHARLES WILLIAMS, Warden, Alien Property Custodian,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley,
District Judge. (1:15-cv-00177-IMK-JES)
Submitted: May 18, 2016 Decided: May 23, 2016
Before SHEDD, DIAZ, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Morris Speight-Bey, Appellant Pro Se. Helen Campbell Altmeyer,
Assistant United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia; Erin K.
Reisenweber, Assistant United States Attorney, Martinsburg, West
Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Morris Speight-Bey seeks to appeal the district court’s order
directing a response to his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) petition. This
court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C.
§ 1291 (2012), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28
U.S.C. § 1292 (2012); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial
Indus. Loan Corp.,
337 U.S. 541, 545-46 (1949). The order Speight-
Bey 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 dispense with oral argument
because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented
in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
DISMISSED
2