US v. Malcolm Tyler
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 5:13-cr-00009-FPS-JSK-2,5:14-cv-00115-FPS-JSK Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999609167]. Mailed to: Malcolm Demon Tyler FCI MCKEAN FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION P. O. Box 8000 Bradford, PA 16701-0980. [15-6048]
Appeal: 15-6048
Doc: 7
Filed: 06/25/2015
Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-6048
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
MALCOLM DEMON TYLER, a/k/a Milt,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Wheeling.
John S. Kaull,
Magistrate Judge.
(5:13-cr-00009-FPS-JSK-2; 5:14-cv-00115-FPSJSK)
Submitted:
June 17, 2015
Decided:
June 25, 2015
Before KEENAN, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Malcolm Demon Tyler, Appellant Pro Se. Tara Noel Tighe,
Assistant United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 15-6048
Doc: 7
Filed: 06/25/2015
Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Malcolm Demon Tyler seeks to appeal the magistrate judge’s
report and recommendation in this action under 28 U.S.C. § 2255
(2012).
This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final
orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2012), and certain interlocutory and
collateral
orders,
54(b); Cohen
v.
545-46 (1949).
28
U.S.C.
Beneficial
§ 1292
Indus.
(2012);
Loan
Fed.
Corp.,
337
R.
Civ.
U.S.
P.
541,
The order Tyler seeks to appeal is neither a
final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral 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?