Robert Enkema v. FTI Consulting, Inc.

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to dismiss appeal [999908489-2]; denying Motion to reconsider [999916555-2] Originating case number: 1:16-cv-01048-JFM Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999962525].. [16-1842]

Appeal: 16-1842

Doc: 26

Filed: 11/04/2016

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-1842

ROBERT ENKEMA,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
FTI CONSULTING, INC.; FTI LLC,
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore.
J. Frederick Motz, Senior District
Judge. (1:16-cv-01048-JFM)

Submitted:

October 7, 2016

Decided:

November 4, 2016

Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jonathan Biran, BIRAN KELLY LLC, Baltimore, Maryland; William
David Bridgers, Andrew Archer Warth, WALLER, LANSDEN, DORTCH &
DAVIS, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellant.
Paul Andrew Fenn,
CONTI, FENN & LAWRENCE, LLC, Baltimore, Maryland; Judith A.
Lockhart, CARTER, LEDYARD & MULBURN, New York, New York, for
Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-1842

Doc: 26

Filed: 11/04/2016

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Robert Enkema seeks to appeal the district court’s order
directing arbitration in his civil action against his former
employer, FTI Consulting, Inc. (“FTI”).

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).

Upon review of the

district court’s order, we conclude that the order in question
stayed

the

district

Enkema’s claims.

court

proceedings

pending

arbitration

Consequently, the order is neither a final

order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order.
9

U.S.C.

of

§ 16(b)(1),

(2)

(2012).

Therefore,

we

grant

See
FTI’s

motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction and deny
as

moot

Enkema’s

motion

briefing schedule.
facts

and

materials

legal
before

to

reconsider

the

suspension

of

the

We dispense with oral argument because the

contentions

are

adequately

this

and

argument

court

presented

would

not

in

the

aid

the

decisional process.
DISMISSED

2