Edward Mercer v. David Ballard
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 2:12-cv-00040-JPB-DJJ. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999156491]. Mailed to: Edward Mercer. [13-6738]
Appeal: 13-6738
Doc: 7
Filed: 07/23/2013
Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-6738
EDWARD J. MERCER,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
WARDEN DAVID BALLARD,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Elkins.
John Preston Bailey,
Chief District Judge. (2:12-cv-00040-JPB-DJJ)
Submitted:
July 18, 2013
Decided:
July 23, 2013
Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Edward J. Mercer, Appellant Pro Se.
Robert David Goldberg,
Assistant Attorney General, Silas B. Taylor, OFFICE OF THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WEST VIRGINIA, Charleston, West Virginia,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 13-6738
Doc: 7
Filed: 07/23/2013
Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Edward J. Mercer seeks to appeal the district court’s
order
adopting
in
part
and
declining
to
adopt
in
part
the
magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, and dismissing as
untimely all but one of Mercer’s claims in his pending 28 U.S.C.
§ 2254 (2006) petition.
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, 545-46 (1949).
is
neither
a
final
order
The order Mercer seeks to appeal
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
materials
legal
before
contentions
are
adequately
this
and
argument
court
presented
would
not
in
the
aid
the
decisional process.
DISMISSED
2
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?