Albert Page v. A. Padula

Filing 920091202

Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-6903 ALBERT D. PAGE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. A. J. PADULA, Warden; ROBERT WARD, Directional Divisional Operations; JOHN BROOKS, Associate Warden; JENNIFER LIVINGSTON, Correctional Officer; JON OZMINT, Director; RON CRIBB, Captain; GENNA CAIN, Officer; MS. SIMON, mailroom personnel at Lee Correctional Institution, Defendants ­ Appellees, and MS. WHITNEY, Institution, mailroom personnel at Lee Correctional Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Beaufort. Bristow Marchant, Magistrate Judge. (9:08-cv-01660-HFF-BM) Submitted: November 19, 2009 Decided: December 2, 2009 Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Albert D. Page, Appellant Pro Se. Andrew Lindemann, DAVIDSON & LINDEMANN, PA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Albert D. Page seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his motion for reconsideration of the district court's order denying, inter alia, Page's motions for orders granting him leave to depose correctional officers and prison inmates and compelling the production of various documents. 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 Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949). The order Page seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Accordingly, we dismiss the We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?