Robert Berkowitz v. US

Filing

AMENDING ORDER/OPINION filed [999367285] amending and superseding Unpublished per curiam Opinion [998452021-3] dated 10/25/2010. Originating case number: 8:09-cv-00651-HMH-BHH Copies to all parties. Mailed to: Robert Alan Berkowitz. [09-2328]

Appeal: 09-2328

Doc: 23

Filed: 06/02/2014

Pg: 1 of 5

Filed:

June 2, 2014

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-2328
(8:09-cv-00651-HMH-BHH)

ROBERT ALAN BERKOWITZ,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; NATIONAL TECHNOLOGY LEASING
CORPORATION;
CARECREDIT,
INCORPORATED
GE
MONEY
COMPANY; ELAVON, INCORPORATED; CHASE PAYMENTECH; FIRST DATA
MERCHANT SERVICES CORPORATION; HPSC, INCORPORATED - GE
HEALTHCARE
FINANCIAL
SERVICES;
GREAT
AMERICAN
LEASING
CORPORATION; DF SERVICES, LLC,
Respondents – Appellees,
and
PATTERSON DENTAL SUPPLY, INCORPORATED; WACHOVIA BANK, N.A.;
BANK OF ANDERSON, NA; CITY OF ANDERSON; BLUE CROSS & BLUE
SHIELD OF SOUTH CAROLINA; DELTA DENTAL PLAN OF MISSOURI;
CIGNA HEALTHCARE BENEFITS, INCORPORATED; CIGNA CORPORATION;
METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY; BARTON R. BRIGHT, III,
a/k/a Chip; NATIONAL PROCESSING COMPANY; GLOBAL PAYMENTS,
INCORPORATED; BANK OF AMERICA; FIFTH THIRD BANK OPERATIONS;
LEGAL ENTRY MD IMOC2Q,
Respondents.

O R D E R

The Court amends its opinion filed October 25, 2010,
as follows:

Appeal: 09-2328

Doc: 23

Filed: 06/02/2014

Pg: 2 of 5

On the cover sheet, the case caption is amended to
correctly identify Respondents-Appellees and Respondents.

For the Court – By Direction

/s/ Patricia S. Connor
Clerk

2

Appeal: 09-2328

Doc: 23

Filed: 06/02/2014

Pg: 3 of 5

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-2328

ROBERT ALAN BERKOWITZ,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; NATIONAL TECHNOLOGY LEASING
CORPORATION;
CARECREDIT,
INCORPORATED
GE
MONEY
COMPANY; ELAVON, INCORPORATED; CHASE PAYMENTECH; FIRST DATA
MERCHANT SERVICES CORPORATION; HPSC, INCORPORATED - GE
HEALTHCARE
FINANCIAL
SERVICES;
GREAT
AMERICAN
LEASING
CORPORATION; DF SERVICES, LLC,
Respondents – Appellees,
and
PATTERSON DENTAL SUPPLY, INCORPORATED; WACHOVIA BANK, N.A.;
BANK OF ANDERSON, NA; CITY OF ANDERSON; BLUE CROSS & BLUE
SHIELD OF SOUTH CAROLINA; DELTA DENTAL PLAN OF MISSOURI;
CIGNA HEALTHCARE BENEFITS, INCORPORATED; CIGNA CORPORATION;
METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY; BARTON R. BRIGHT, III,
a/k/a Chip; NATIONAL PROCESSING COMPANY; GLOBAL PAYMENTS,
INCORPORATED; BANK OF AMERICA; FIFTH THIRD BANK OPERATIONS;
LEGAL ENTRY MD IMOC2Q,
Respondents.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Anderson.
Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior
District Judge. (8:09-cv-00651-HMH-BHH)

Submitted:

October 19, 2010

Decided:

October 25, 2010

Appeal: 09-2328

Doc: 23

Filed: 06/02/2014

Pg: 4 of 5

Before DUNCAN, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Robert Alan Berkowitz, Appellant Pro Se.
George John Conits,
Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina;
Laurie Allyn Snyder, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,
Washington, D.C., for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Appeal: 09-2328

Doc: 23

Filed: 06/02/2014

Pg: 5 of 5

PER CURIAM:
Robert

Alan

Berkowitz

seeks

to

appeal

the

district

court’s order denying in part and granting in part the United
States’ motion to dismiss some, but not all, of the respondents
in

his

petition

to

quash

summonses

issued

by

Revenue Service upon third-party record-keepers.

the

Internal

This court may

exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291
(2006),

and

certain

interlocutory

and

collateral

orders,

28

U.S.C. § 1292 (2006); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial
Indus.

Loan

Berkowitz

Corp.,

seeks

to

337

U.S.

appeal

541,

is

545-46

neither

a

(1949).
final

appealable interlocutory or collateral order.
dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
oral

argument

adequately

because

presented

in

the
the

facts

and

materials

legal
before

The

order

order

nor

an

Accordingly, we
We dispense with
contentions
the

court

are
and

argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED

3