Curtis Taylor, Sr. v. George Hinkle
Curtis Taylor, Sr. v. George Hinkle
Opinion
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
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.