Dmitry Pronin v. Lieutenant Troy Johnson
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 5:12-cv-03416-DCN Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000027835]. Mailed to: Dmitry Pronin UNITED STATES PENITENTIARY FLORENCE - HIGH P. O. Box 7000 Florence, CO 81226. [16-7562]
Appeal: 16-7562
Doc: 15
Filed: 02/22/2017
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-7562
DMITRY PRONIN,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
LIEUTENANT
TROY
JOHNSON;
OFFICER
FLOURNOY;
OFFICER
MIDDLEBROOK; OFFICER WILSON; OFFICER CRAWFORD; KENNETH
ATKINSON; DANIEL FALLEN; REX BLOCKER; LOUISA FUERTESRASARIO; SANDRA K. LATHROP; JAKE BURKETT; BRANDON BURKETT;
JOHN BRYANT; PATINA WALTON-GRIER; HENRI WALL; EDWARD
HAMPTON; WILLIAM JOHNSON; LIEUTENANT EDA OLIVERA-NEGRON,
Operations,
Defendants – Appellees,
and
SHU STAFF MEMBERS,
Defendant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Orangeburg. David C. Norton, District Judge.
(5:12-cv-03416-DCN)
Submitted:
February 16, 2017
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge,
HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Decided:
DUNCAN,
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
February 22, 2017
Circuit
Judge,
and
Appeal: 16-7562
Doc: 15
Filed: 02/22/2017
Pg: 2 of 3
Dmitry Pronin, Appellant Pro Se. Barbara Murcier Bowens,
Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
Appeal: 16-7562
Doc: 15
Filed: 02/22/2017
Pg: 3 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Dmitry Pronin appeals the district court’s notice regarding
his right to respond to Defendants’ motion for summary judgment.
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 Pronin seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an
appealable interlocutory or collateral order.
Accordingly, we
dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
We dispense with
oral
contentions
argument
adequately
because
presented
in
the
the
facts
and
materials
legal
before
this
court
are
and
argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
3
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?