David Gambino v. Frank Hershberger
David Gambino v. Frank Hershberger
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 20-6591
DAVID A. GAMBINO, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. FRANK HERSHBERGER; SHANE SHEETZ; KRISTI CRITES; DR. MOHAMED MOUBAREK; BRETT DODD; LIEUTENANT EIRICH; C. TODD; WARDEN STEWART; COUNSELOR SMITH; JANE DOE, Assistant Warden; 4 JANE DOE MEDICAL PROVIDERS AT FCI CUMBERLAND; 8 JOHN DOE OFFICERS AT FCI CUMBERLAND; JOHN DOE, Representative for Mid Atlantic Office of BOP; CAROL MILLER; TOM GERA; JODY AMERZUA; P. BOCH; DENISE VANMETER; TEQUILA MCGAHEE; BLAINE SMITH; CARRIE HANSCOM, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt.
Theodore D. Chuang, District Judge. (8:17-cv-01701-TDC)
Submitted: June 16, 2020 Decided: June 19, 2020
Before MOTZ and KING, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
David A. Gambino, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: David A. Gambino seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion to hold his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2018) action in abeyance pending his expected release from federal custody on October 28, 2020. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2018), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2018); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46 (1949). The order Gambino seeks 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
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.