Walter Lee v. 107th United States Congre

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999769034-2]. Originating case number: 3:02-cv-00706-REP. Copies to all parties and the district court. [999898167]. Mailed to: Walter Lee. [16-1033]

Appeal: 16-1033

Doc: 13

Filed: 07/27/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-1033

WALTER LEE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
107TH UNITED STATES CONGRESS; JOHN WARNER, Senator, R-VA, In
his official capacity as a member of the 107th United States
Congress and Senatorial Representative of the Plaintiffs
civil rights; GEORGE ALLEN, Senator, in his official
capacity as a member of the 107th United States Congress and
Senatorial Representative of the Plaintiffs civil rights;
JOANN DAVIS, Rep, R-VA, in her official capacity as a member
of the 107th United States Congress and Legislative
Representative of the Plaintiffs civil rights,
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond.
Robert E. Payne, Senior
District Judge. (3:02-cv-00706-REP)

Submitted:

July 20, 2016

Before GREGORY,
Judges.

Chief

Judge,

Decided:

and

DUNCAN

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Walter Lee, Appellant Pro Se.

and

July 27, 2016

AGEE,

Circuit

Appeal: 16-1033

Doc: 13

Filed: 07/27/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Appeal: 16-1033

Doc: 13

Filed: 07/27/2016

Pg: 3 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Walter Lee seeks to appeal the district court’s order and
the district court clerk’s letter stating the requirements for
filing an action in forma pauperis.

This court may exercise

jurisdiction only over final orders of the district court, 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).

The

order and letter that Lee seeks to appeal are neither final
orders

nor

appealable

Accordingly,

we

deny

interlocutory

leave

to

proceed

or
in

collateral
forma

dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
oral

argument

adequately

because

presented

in

the
the

facts

and

materials

legal
before

orders.

pauperis

and

We dispense with
contentions
this

court

are
and

argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED

3