Filed: Aug. 23, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-6432 RICHARD D. MOISE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. WARDEN; F. BISHOP; J. NINES; G. SINDY; K. LAMP; LT. WHITEMAN; SGT. CONNERS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (1:18-cv-02678-RDB) Submitted: August 20, 2019 Decided: August 23, 2019 Before FLOYD and RUSHING, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismis
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-6432 RICHARD D. MOISE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. WARDEN; F. BISHOP; J. NINES; G. SINDY; K. LAMP; LT. WHITEMAN; SGT. CONNERS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (1:18-cv-02678-RDB) Submitted: August 20, 2019 Decided: August 23, 2019 Before FLOYD and RUSHING, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismiss..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 19-6432
RICHARD D. MOISE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
WARDEN; F. BISHOP; J. NINES; G. SINDY; K. LAMP; LT. WHITEMAN; SGT.
CONNERS,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.
Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (1:18-cv-02678-RDB)
Submitted: August 20, 2019 Decided: August 23, 2019
Before FLOYD and RUSHING, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Richard D. Moise, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Richard D. Moise filed a notice of appeal in his pending 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012)
action. 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). Here,
the district court has not entered a final order or an appealable interlocutory or collateral
order. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction and deny Moise’s
pending motions. 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