Lawrence Wilder, Sr. v. Carolyn Colvin
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999788024-2]. Originating case number: 7:15-cv-00046-D. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999939729]. Mailed to: Lawrence Wilder. [16-1241]
Appeal: 16-1241
Doc: 7
Filed: 10/03/2016
Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-1241
LAWRENCE VERLINE WILDER, SR.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Wilmington.
James E. Gates,
Magistrate Judge. (7:15-cv-00046-D)
Submitted:
September 29, 2016
Decided:
October 3, 2016
Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Lawrence Verline Wilder, Sr., Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 16-1241
Doc: 7
Filed: 10/03/2016
Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Lawrence
Verline
Wilder,
Sr.,
seeks
to
appeal
the
magistrate judge’s order denying his request for a hearing and
for appointment of counsel in his civil action.
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
Wilder
seeks
Corp.,
to
337
appeal
U.S.
is
541,
545-46
neither
a
(1949).
final
appealable interlocutory or collateral order.
The
order
order
nor
an
Accordingly, we
deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal
for
lack
of
jurisdiction.
We
dispense
with
oral
argument
because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented
in the 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?