BLAISE v. HARRIS, 16-1968. (2016)
Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Number: infco20161222113
Visitors: 8
Filed: Dec. 22, 2016
Latest Update: Dec. 22, 2016
Summary: UNPUBLISHED Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM : Die K. Blaise seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing part of his civil complaint with prejudice and dismissing the remainder without prejudice. Blaise has since filed an amended civil complaint raising the claims dismissed without prejudice, and that action remains pending with the district court. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. 1291 (2012), and
Summary: UNPUBLISHED Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM : Die K. Blaise seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing part of his civil complaint with prejudice and dismissing the remainder without prejudice. Blaise has since filed an amended civil complaint raising the claims dismissed without prejudice, and that action remains pending with the district court. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. 1291 (2012), and c..
More
UNPUBLISHED
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Die K. Blaise seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing part of his civil complaint with prejudice and dismissing the remainder without prejudice. Blaise has since filed an amended civil complaint raising the claims dismissed without prejudice, and that action remains pending with the district court. 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 Blaise 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 this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED.
Source: Leagle
