Filed: Feb. 26, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-7364 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. KIERON MATTHEW WILLIAMS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. George L. Russell, III, District Judge. (1:14-cr-00596-GLR-1; 1:17-cv-00440-GLR) Submitted: February 21, 2019 Decided: February 26, 2019 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and AGEE and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curi
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-7364 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. KIERON MATTHEW WILLIAMS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. George L. Russell, III, District Judge. (1:14-cr-00596-GLR-1; 1:17-cv-00440-GLR) Submitted: February 21, 2019 Decided: February 26, 2019 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and AGEE and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curia..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 18-7364
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
KIERON MATTHEW WILLIAMS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.
George L. Russell, III, District Judge. (1:14-cr-00596-GLR-1; 1:17-cv-00440-GLR)
Submitted: February 21, 2019 Decided: February 26, 2019
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and AGEE and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Kieron Matthew Williams, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Kieron Matthew Williams seeks to appeal the district court’s margin order
denying his motion for leave to exceed the page limit on his reply brief. 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
Williams 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