James Roudabush, Jr. v. Theodore Nelson , 590 F. App'x 248 ( 2015 )


Menu:
  •                                UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 14-7655
    JAMES LESTER ROUDABUSH, JR.,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    THEODORE C. NELSON, SA, U.S. Department of State; JASON
    CALLAHAN,   Detective,   Prince    William   County   Police
    Department; STEPHAN HUDSON, Chief, Prince William Police
    Department;   REBECCA   THATCHER,   Assistant   Commonwealth
    Attorney; JOHN/JANE DOE, Prince William County Police
    Department, Evidence Sect. Director; CHRIS FELDMAN,
    Defendants - Appellees.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Norfolk.    Rebecca Beach Smith, Chief
    District Judge. (2:13-cv-00641-RBS-DEM)
    Submitted:   January 6, 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    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    James      Lester    Roudabush,       Jr.,    seeks     to     appeal       the
    district court’s October 3, 2014 order denying his motions to
    recuse   and   relative     to    his    inmate     trust    account,       dismissing
    three defendants, denying his motion to expedite, 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
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 14-7655

Citation Numbers: 590 F. App'x 248

Judges: Duncan, Diaz, Hamilton

Filed Date: 1/16/2015

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024