Henry Steele v. Donald Mobley

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 5:14-ct-03298-F Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999973145]. Mailed to: John Holton, John Minier and Henry Steele. [16-7209]

Appeal: 16-7209

Doc: 10

Filed: 11/22/2016

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-7209

HENRY J. STEELE,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
DONALD MOBLEY; CLARENCE
CAROLINE TAYLOR,

LEE

FAULCON;

PETER

B.

WOGLOM;

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
James C. Fox, Senior
District Judge. (5:14-ct-03298-F)

Submitted:

November 17, 2016

Before GREGORY,
Judges.

Chief

Judge,

Decided:

and

MOTZ

and

November 22, 2016

TRAXLER,

Circuit

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Henry J. Steele, Appellant Pro Se. Joseph Finarelli, Special
Deputy Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina; John W.
Holton, John Walton Minier, YATES, MCLAMB & WEYHER, LLP,
Raleigh, North Carolina; Kelly Street Brown, Elizabeth Pharr
McCullough, YOUNG MOORE & HENDERSON, PA, Raleigh, North
Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-7209

Doc: 10

Filed: 11/22/2016

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Henry J. Steele seeks to appeal the district court’s order
dismissing two named defendants in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012)
action.

This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final

orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2012), and certain interlocutory and
collateral

orders,

54(b); Cohen

v.

545-46 (1949).

28

U.S.C.

Beneficial

§ 1292

Indus.

(2012);

Loan

Fed.

Corp.,

337

R.

Civ.

U.S.

P.

541,

The order Steele seeks to appeal is neither a

final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order.
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
dispense

with

contentions

are

oral

argument

adequately

because

presented

in

the
the

facts

We

and

legal

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

2