Awan Hardy v. Booker

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999970256-2] Originating case number: 3:15-cv-00484-HEH-RCY Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000027944]. Mailed to: Awan Hardy. [16-7571]

Appeal: 16-7571

Doc: 9

Filed: 02/22/2017

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-7571

AWAN HARDY,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
BOOKER, Officer, City of Fredericksburg; TONEY, Officer,
City of Farmville; ARIES, Officer, City of Farmville,
Defendants – Appellees,
and
PIEDMONT REGIONAL JAIL; MEDIKO PC, Piedmont Regional Jail;
DONALD HUNTER, City of Farmville,
Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond.
Henry E. Hudson, District
Judge. (3:15-cv-00484-HEH-RCY)

Submitted:

February 16, 2017

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge,
HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Decided:

DUNCAN,

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Awan Hardy, Appellant Pro Se.

February 22, 2017

Circuit

Judge,

and

Appeal: 16-7571

Doc: 9

Filed: 02/22/2017

Pg: 2 of 3

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Appeal: 16-7571

Doc: 9

Filed: 02/22/2017

Pg: 3 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Awan

Hardy

dismissing

his

seeks
42

to

U.S.C.

appeal
§

the

1983

district

(2012)

court’s

complaint

prejudice for failure to serve the defendants.

order

without

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, 545-47 (1949).

Because Hardy

may refile his complaint and serve defendants, we conclude that
the order Hardy seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an
appealable interlocutory or collateral order.

Goode v. Cent.

Va. Legal Aid Soc’y, Inc., 807 F.3d 619, 623 (4th Cir. 2015);
Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d
1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir. 1993).

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

3