Curtis Murdock, III v. Ironplanet, Inc.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Curtis Murdock, III v. Ironplanet, Inc.

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 24-1825 Doc: 27 Filed: 11/21/2024 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 24-1825

CURTIS STERLING MURDOCK, III,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

IRONPLANET, INC.; JAKE LAWSON, in his official capacity; BRIAN PARKS, in his official capacity; EMMA TUCKLEY, in her official capacity,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Brian Scott Meyers, Magistrate Judge. (5:23-cv-00580-M-BM)

Submitted: November 19, 2024 Decided: November 21, 2024

Before QUATTLEBAUM, RUSHING, and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Curtis Sterling Murdock, III, Appellant Pro Se. Alexandra Harrington Austin, MAYNARD NEXSEN PC, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 24-1825 Doc: 27 Filed: 11/21/2024 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:

Curtis Sterling Murdock, III, seeks to appeal the magistrate judge’s

recommendation to grant Defendants’ motion to dismiss Murdock’s amended civil

complaint. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders,

28 U.S.C. § 1291

,

and certain interlocutory and collateral orders,

28 U.S.C. § 1292

; Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b);

Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp.,

337 U.S. 541, 545-46

(1949). The order Murdock

seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order.

Therefore, while we grant Murdock’s motion to amend his filings on appeal, 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

2

Reference

Status
Unpublished