Filed: Aug. 22, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-1628 CURTIS GLENN MOORER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MR. LUTHI; NEW CAROLINA MORTGAGE; CHRISTOPHER EDWARDS; MOSS & ASSOCIATES, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. R. Bryan Harwell, Chief District Judge. (6:17-cv-01749-RBH) Submitted: August 20, 2019 Decided: August 22, 2019 Before FLOYD and RUSHING, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit J
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-1628 CURTIS GLENN MOORER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MR. LUTHI; NEW CAROLINA MORTGAGE; CHRISTOPHER EDWARDS; MOSS & ASSOCIATES, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. R. Bryan Harwell, Chief District Judge. (6:17-cv-01749-RBH) Submitted: August 20, 2019 Decided: August 22, 2019 Before FLOYD and RUSHING, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Ju..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 19-1628
CURTIS GLENN MOORER,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
MR. LUTHI; NEW CAROLINA MORTGAGE; CHRISTOPHER EDWARDS;
MOSS & ASSOCIATES,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
Greenville. R. Bryan Harwell, Chief District Judge. (6:17-cv-01749-RBH)
Submitted: August 20, 2019 Decided: August 22, 2019
Before FLOYD and RUSHING, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Curtis Glenn Moorer, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Curtis Glenn Moorer seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying Moorer’s
motion to withdraw the district court’s reference of Moorer’s civil case to the bankruptcy
court, after the district court adopted the recommendation of the magistrate judge to refer
the case. 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 Moorer 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