Johnny Belsome v. Rex Venture Group, LLC

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Johnny Belsome v. Rex Venture Group, LLC

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-1710

SECURITIES & EXCHANGE COMMISSION,

Plaintiff,

and

JOHNNY BELSOME; TIMOTHY ALLEN; JODY HINKLEY; DONALD MARCEL; KEITH HINKLEY; STARR ATCHISON; EDWARD THIEL; BRETT HUNTER; TARA BELSOME, and those similarly situated,

Movants – Appellants,

v.

REX VENTURE GROUP, LLC, d/b/a Zeekrewards.com; RECEIVER FOR REX VENTURES GROUP, LLC,

Defendants – Appellees,

and

PAUL R. BURKS; TRUDY GILMOND; KELLIE KING,

Defendants,

and

NATHANIEL WOODS,

Movant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Senior District Judge. (3:12-cv-00519-GCM) Submitted: December 22, 2014 Decided: January 7, 2015

Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Marc R. Michaud, New Orleans, Louisiana, for Appellants. Irving M. Brenner, Kenneth D. Bell, Matthew E. Orso, MCGUIREWOODS, LLP, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2 PER CURIAM:

Johnny Belsome, et al., appeal from the district

court’s order clarifying a prior order and directing that any

payments made by the Receiver be sent to a claimant’s home

address rather than any third party, including attorneys. This

court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders,

28 U.S.C. § 1291

(2012), and certain interlocutory and collateral

orders,

28 U.S.C. § 1292

(2012); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v.

Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp.,

337 U.S. 541, 545-46

(1949). The

order the Appellants 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 this court and

argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3

Reference

Status
Unpublished