Brito v. Burlington
Brito v. Burlington
Opinion of the Court
Rafael Cornelio Matos Brito appeals the dismissal in part of his civil rights complaint brought under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971). 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. § 1291 (1994), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (1994); Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The order here appealed is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order.
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
- Full Case Name
- Rafael Cornelio Matos BRITO v. Bill D. BURLINGTON Margaret C. Hambrick Harrell Watts, and Janet Reno, Attorney General Kathleen Hawkin, B.O.P., Director Joseph Brooks, VA-Warden F.S. Wheeler
- Status
- Published