James Roudabush, Jr. v. Lt. Josiah ( 2015 )


Menu:
  •                                UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 14-7667
    JAMES LESTER ROUDABUSH, JR.,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    LT. JOSIAH; SGT. JESSUP; CHIEF STERN; DEPUTY STERN; CAPT.
    MILANO; DANA LAWHORNE, Sherriff,
    Defendants – Appellees,
    and
    A. ANDERSON, AUSA; C. M. HILTON, Usdc-Edva,
    Defendants.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Norfolk.    Rebecca Beach Smith, Chief
    District Judge. (2:13-cv-00467-RBS-TEM)
    Submitted:   January 5, 2015                 Decided:   January 16, 2015
    Before DUNCAN and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    James Lester Roudabush, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.       Broderick
    Coleman Dunn, Alexander Francuzenko, COOK CRAIG & FRANCUZENKO,
    PLLC, Fairfax, Virginia, for Appellees.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    2
    PER CURIAM:
    James    Lester           Roudabush,         Jr.   —    a   federal      pretrial
    detainee — seeks to appeal the district court’s September 19,
    2014 order granting his motion to reopen and vacating its prior
    order of dismissal, denying his motion to recuse, denying his
    motion    relating      to    the        withdrawal         of   funds    from    his     inmate
    account,      denying        his        motions       to    expedite,      dismissing          two
    defendants, and requesting that the remaining defendants return
    waivers of service.            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
    ,    545-47        (1949).           The    order     Roudabush       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
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 14-7667

Filed Date: 1/16/2015

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/16/2015