Filed: Dec. 27, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-6905 JASON VANN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. BARBARA MEAD, Medical Staff Supervisor, Defendant - Appellee, and RAPPAHANNOCK REGIONAL JAIL, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (2:17-cv-00274-RAJ-RJK) Submitted: December 21, 2017 Decided: December 27, 2017 Before WILKINSON and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Ci
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-6905 JASON VANN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. BARBARA MEAD, Medical Staff Supervisor, Defendant - Appellee, and RAPPAHANNOCK REGIONAL JAIL, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (2:17-cv-00274-RAJ-RJK) Submitted: December 21, 2017 Decided: December 27, 2017 Before WILKINSON and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Cir..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 17-6905
JASON VANN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
BARBARA MEAD, Medical Staff Supervisor,
Defendant - Appellee,
and
RAPPAHANNOCK REGIONAL JAIL,
Defendant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (2:17-cv-00274-RAJ-RJK)
Submitted: December 21, 2017 Decided: December 27, 2017
Before WILKINSON and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit
Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jason Vann, Appellant Pro Se. Alexander Francuzenko, COOK CRAIG &
FRANCUZENKO, PLLC, Fairfax, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
PER CURIAM:
Jason Vann seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion for
appointment of counsel. Barbara Mead has moved to dismiss the appeal. 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 Vann seeks to
appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order.
Accordingly, we grant Mead’s motion to dismiss 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
3