Dmitry Pronin v. Lieutenant Troy Johnson


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed.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]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-7562 Doc: 15 Filed: 02/22/2017 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-7562 DMITRY PRONIN, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. LIEUTENANT TROY JOHNSON; OFFICER FLOURNOY; OFFICER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 Decided: DUNCAN, Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 Appeal: 16-7562 Doc: 15 Filed: 02/22/2017 Pg: 3 of 3 PER CURIAM: Dmitry Pronin appeals the district court’s notice regarding his right to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?