John Cutonilli v. State of Maryland

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:15-cv-00629-JKB Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999764080]. Mailed to: John Cutonilli 1606 Portugal Street Baltimore, MD 21231. [15-2202]

Appeal: 15-2202

Doc: 8

Filed: 02/29/2016

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-2202

JOHN CUTONILLI,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
STATE OF MARYLAND,
Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore.
James K. Bredar, District Judge.
(1:15-cv-00629-JKB)

Submitted:

February 25, 2016

Before SHEDD and
Circuit Judge.

HARRIS,

Circuit

Decided:

Judges,

February 29, 2016

and

DAVIS,

Senior

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John Cutonilli, Appellant Pro Se.
Mark Holdsworth Bowen,
Assistant Attorney General, Pikesville, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-2202

Doc: 8

Filed: 02/29/2016

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
John Cutonilli seeks to appeal the district court’s order
granting, in part, and denying without prejudice, in part, the
State

of

Maryland’s

challenging

motion

Maryland’s

to

Firearm

dismiss

Safety

Act

Cutonilli’s
of

2013,

claims

Md.

Code

Ann., Crim. L. §§ 4-301 to 4-306 (LexisNexis 2015), as violative
of

Maryland’s

Constitution

and

the

Second

and

Amendments to the United States Constitution.

Fourteenth

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

Cutonilli

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
this

court

are
and

argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

2