Edmund Awah v. TransUnion
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:15-cv-02042-ELH Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999828574]. Mailed to: E. Awah. [15-2544]
Appeal: 15-2544
Doc: 19
Filed: 05/20/2016
Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-2544
EDMUND AWAH,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
TRANSUNION; EQUIFAX; EXPERIAN,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore.
Ellen L. Hollander, District Judge.
(1:15-cv-02042-ELH)
Submitted:
May 18, 2016
Decided:
May 20, 2016
Before SHEDD, DIAZ, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Edmund K. Awah, Appellant Pro Se.
Nathan Daniel Adler,
NEUBERGER, QUINN, GIELEN, RUBIN & GIBBER, PA, Baltimore,
Maryland; Sandy David Baron, SHULMAN, ROGERS, GANDAL, PORDY &
ECKER, PA, Potomac, Maryland, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 15-2544
Doc: 19
Filed: 05/20/2016
Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Edmund
Awah
seeks
to
appeal
the
district
court’s
order
denying his motion to remand his civil case back to state court
after it was removed to federal court.
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, 545-46 (1949).
to
appeal
is
interlocutory
neither
or
a
final
collateral
The order Awah seeks
order
order.
See
nor
an
appealable
Caterpillar
Inc.
v.
Lewis, 519 U.S. 61, 74 (1996) (noting that an order denying a
motion
to
remand,
standing
alone,
is
not
final
order).
Accordingly, we 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
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?