U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2015

Arthur Rodgers v. Michael Stallings

Arthur Rodgers v. Michael Stallings
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided January 27, 2015

Arthur Rodgers v. Michael Stallings

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7291

ARTHUR RODGERS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MICHAEL STALLINGS; LEAH YOUNGBLOOD; SERGEANT WHITACRE; OFFICER PORTMESS; SOTTAS; LAMBERT; UNKNOWN NBCI PRISON STAFF; SCOTT OAKLEY; ROBIN WOOLFORD, Defendants – Appellees and OORT, Defendant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, Chief District Judge. (1:12-cv-03778-CCB)

Submitted: January 22, 2015 Decided: January 27, 2015

Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Arthur Rodgers, Appellant Pro Se. Stephanie Judith Lane-Weber, Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: Arthur Rodgers seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying Rodgers’ motions for discovery and appointment of counsel in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) civil rights action.

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 Rodgers seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction and deny the pending motion 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

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