Barry Bluefeld v. Barry Cohen


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to strike [999979270-2]; and denying Motion to impose sanctions [999979270-3] Originating case number: 8:15-cv-02857-PX Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000031016].. [16-2207]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-2207 Doc: 20 Filed: 02/27/2017 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-2207 BARRY J. BLUEFELD, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. BARRY S. COHEN; JOEL S. MEISEL; DAVID H. COHEN, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Paula Xinis, District Judge. (8:15-cv02857-PX) Submitted: February 23, 2017 Decided: February 27, 2017 Before SHEDD and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Barry J. Bluefeld, Appellant Pro Se. Matthew D. Matkov, SALTZ MATKOV PC, Wayne, Pennsylvania, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 16-2207 Doc: 20 Filed: 02/27/2017 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Barry order J. Bluefeld granting correspondence. the seeks to Defendants’ appeal motion the to district court’s strike certain 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, 54546 (1949). The order Bluefeld seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we deny the Appellees’ motions to strike and for sanctions, and we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We dispense contentions with are oral argument adequately because presented in the facts and the materials legal 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?