Givens v. Smith
Opinion of the Court
Greg P. Givens seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting the report and recommendation of the magistrate judge and granting in part and denying in part Defendants’ motion to dismiss, and imposing a prefiling injunction. 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 Givens 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 deny Givens’ motions to strike and for appointment of counsel. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Greg P. GIVENS v. Scott R. SMITH, individually and collectively Keith C. Gamble, individually and collectively Stephen M. Fowler, individually and collectively D. Luke Furbee, individually and collectively Officer S.A. Zimmerman, individually and collectively Officer D.L. Robinson, individually and collectively County Of Ohio, West Virginia, individually and collectively Honorable James P. Mazzone, individually and collectively Honorable Arthur M. Recht, individually and collectively Honorable Ronald E. Wilson, individually and collectively Kenneth W. Blake, individually and collectively Julie L. Kreefer, individually and collectively Toni Vancamp, individually and collectively The State Journal, individually and collectively Susan Hamrick, individually and collectively, and J.C. WEAVER, Movant
- Status
- Published