Steven Johnson v. The State of North Carolina

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to abate appeal, denying motion to reconsider designation of the parties [999629653-2]; denying Motion to reset the appellate timetable [999599772-3]; denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999584351-2] Originating case number: 4:14-cv-00050-FL Copies to all parties and the district court. [999683767]. Mailed to: Steven Johnson. [15-1271]

Appeal: 15-1271

Doc: 33

Filed: 10/22/2015

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-1271

STEVEN-GLENN: JOHNSON and STEVEN GLENN JOHNSON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA,
Defendant – Appellee,
and
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; FEDERAL RESERVE, And all those
similarly situated,
Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Greenville. Louise W. Flanagan,
District Judge. (4:14-cv-00050-FL)

Submitted:

October 20, 2015

Decided:

October 22, 2015

Before MOTZ, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Steven Glenn Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Olga Eugenia Vysotskaya
de Brito, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina,
for Appellee.
Matthew Fesak, Assistant United States Attorney,
Raleigh, North Carolina, for Defendants.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-1271

Doc: 33

Filed: 10/22/2015

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Steven Glenn Johnson seeks to appeal the district court’s
order granting North Carolina’s motion to set aside entry of
default

judgment

and

denying

his

ancillary

motions

and

the

court’s text order denying Johnson’s motion to alter or amend
the judgment and his companion motion.
59(e).

See Fed. R. Civ. P.

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, 54546 (1949).
orders

The orders Johnson seeks to appeal are neither final

nor

Accordingly,

appealable
we

deny

interlocutory

Johnson’s

or

pending

collateral

motions

to

orders.

reconsider

designation of the parties, to reset the appellate timetable,
and

to

abate

the

appeal;

deny

leave

to

proceed

in

forma

pauperis; and dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
dispense

with

contentions

are

oral

argument

adequately

because

presented

in

the
the

facts

We

and

legal

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED

2