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

Thomas Ritter v. Washington Mutual Bank, N.A.

Thomas Ritter v. Washington Mutual Bank, N.A.
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided August 1, 2011

Thomas Ritter v. Washington Mutual Bank, N.A.

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-1183

THOMAS RITTER; SALLY RITTER, Plaintiffs – Appellants, v. WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK, N.A.; MORGAN CHASE BANK HOME LENDING, Defendants – Appellees, and SECURITY FINANCIAL CORPORATION; MICHAEL G. KENNY AND ASSOCIATES, Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge. (1:10-cv-00438-GBL-TCB)

Submitted: July 21, 2011 Decided: August 1, 2011

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Thomas Ritter; Sally Ritter, Appellants Pro Se. Diana Margeaux Witherspoon, MILES & STOCKBRIDGE, McLean, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: Thomas and Sally Ritter seek to appeal the district court’s order dismissing, with prejudice, their amended complaint against some but not all defendants. 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 (1949). The order that the Ritters seek to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we 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

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