James M. Burrow, Jr. v. Donna E. Shalala, Secretary of Health and Human Services

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
James M. Burrow, Jr. v. Donna E. Shalala, Secretary of Health and Human Services, 42 F.3d 1385 (4th Cir. 1994)
1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 39319; 1994 WL 681118

James M. Burrow, Jr. v. Donna E. Shalala, Secretary of Health and Human Services

Opinion

42 F.3d 1385

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
James M. BURROW, Jr., Plaintiff Appellant,
v.
Donna E. SHALALA, Secretary of Health and Human Services,
Defendant Appellee.

No. 94-1484.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted November 17, 1994.
Decided December 5, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. G. Warthen Downs, Magistrate Judge. (CA-92-501)

James M. Burrow, Jr., appellant pro se. Robert Drum, United States Department of Health & Human Services, Philadelphia, PA; Debra Jean Prillaman, Asst. U.S. Atty., Richmond, VA, for appellee.

E.D.Va.

DISMISSED.

Before RUSSELL and MURNAGHAN, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM

1

Appellant appeals from a magistrate judge's report and recommendation made pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 636(b) (1988). We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the order is not appealable. This Court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 (1988), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1292 (1988); Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949). The order here appealed is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order.

2

We dismiss the appeal as interlocutory. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the Court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

Reference

Status
Unpublished