U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2011

Curtis Taylor, Sr. v. George Hinkle

Curtis Taylor, Sr. v. George Hinkle
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided June 15, 2011 · Niemeyer, Motz, King
435 F. App'x 180

Curtis Taylor, Sr. v. George Hinkle

Opinion

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Curtis Leon Taylor, Sr. seeks to appeal the magistrate judge’s order granting his request to treat his amended motion to compel as a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. * This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2006), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2006); Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The order Taylor seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and 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 the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED.

*

The parties consented to the exercise of jurisdiction by the magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2006).

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.