Kenneth Newkirk v. Department of Correction

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999918981-2]. Originating case number: 3:16-cv-00265-HEH-RCY. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency [999973093]. Mailed to: Kenneth H. Newkirk. [16-7097]

Appeal: 16-7097

Doc: 8

Filed: 11/22/2016

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-7097

KENNETH NEWKIRK,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Director,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond.
Roderick Charles Young,
Magistrate Judge. (3:16-cv-00265-HEH-RCY)

Submitted:

November 17, 2016

Decided:

November 22, 2016

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and MOTZ and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Kenneth H. Newkirk, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-7097

Doc: 8

Filed: 11/22/2016

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Kenneth Newkirk seeks to appeal the magistrate judge’s order
directing Newkirk to pay the filing fee or explain why he cannot
and denying a host of motions without prejudice.

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).

The order Newkirk seeks

to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory
or collateral order.

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