Michael Ellis v. Kanawha County Public Library


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999974835-2]; denying Motion to impose sanctions [999975909-2]; granting Motion to dismiss appeal [999975900-2] Originating case number: 2:15-cv-05698 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000056996]. Mailed to: Michael Ellis 168 5th Street Dunbar, WV 25064. [16-2244]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-2244 Doc: 19 Filed: 04/06/2017 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-2244 MICHAEL ELLIS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. KANAWHA COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY, Defendant - Appellee, and ALAN ENGLEBERT, Director, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Charleston. Thomas E. Johnston, District Judge. (2:15-cv-05698) Submitted: March 30, 2017 Decided: April 6, 2017 Before DUNCAN, KEENAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael Ellis, Appellant Pro Se. Craig W. Snethen, GORDON & REES, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 16-2244 Doc: 19 Filed: 04/06/2017 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Michael Ellis seeks to appeal the district court’s order partially granting the Appellee’s motion to dismiss Ellis’ complaint and referring the matter to a magistrate judge for consideration of the remaining claim. 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). to appeal is neither a final interlocutory or collateral order. The order Ellis seeks order nor an appealable Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We deny the Appellee’s motion for sanctions and a prefiling injunction because Ellis’ litigation does not warrant sanctions. 1997) See, e.g., Foley v. Fix, 106 F.3d 556, 558 (4th Cir. (sanctioning pro se litigant who filed 23 frivolous appeals in just over one year); Autry v. Woods, 106 F.3d 61, 63 (4th Cir. 1997) (sanctioning pro se litigant who filed more than a dozen actions in which he threatened, harassed, or demeaned women in the criminal justice system). 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?