Cobey LaKemper v. George Solomon ( 2019 )


Menu:
  •                                      UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 19-6891
    COBEY LAKEMPER,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    GEORGE T. SOLOMON, Director of Prisons; BENJAMIN A. CARVER, Assistant
    Superintendent - Alexander C.I.; CAPTAIN CHESTER, SRG Correctional Officer
    - Alexander C.I.; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER DULA, SRG Correctional Officer
    - Alexander C.I.; CHRISTOPHER RICH, Chief SRG Coordinator - Division of
    Prisons; LEVI BROTHERS, SRG Correctional Officer - Pasquotank C.I.; LARRY
    SWAIN, SRG Correctional Officer - Pasquotank C.I.; KENNETH E. LASSITER,
    Director of Prisons,
    Defendants - Appellees,
    and
    ERIC T. DYE, Assistant Superintendent - Alexander C.I.; ARTHUR A. SICIAK,
    Unit Manager - Alexander C.I.; FELIX TAYLOR, Superintendent - Pasquotank
    C.I.; COLBERT RESPESS, Assistant Superintendent - Pasquotank C.I.; JOSEPH
    HARRELL, Assistant Superintendent - Pasquotank C.I.; CORRECTIONAL
    OFFICER BLANKENSHIP, Correctional Officer - Alexander C.I.,
    Defendants.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at
    Statesville. Frank D. Whitney, Chief District Judge. (5:17-cv-00073-FDW)
    Submitted: November 22, 2019                                  Decided: December 4, 2019
    Before AGEE and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Cobey LaKemper, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    2
    PER CURIAM:
    Cobey LaKemper seeks to appeal the district court’s order granting in part and
    denying in part Defendants’ motion for summary judgment. 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 LaKemper 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
    *
    LaKemper’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b) motion for permission to immediately appeal is
    still pending in the district court.
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 19-6891

Filed Date: 12/4/2019

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 12/4/2019