Muzhgan Nazarova v. Duke University
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:16-cv-00910-WO-JEP. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. . Mailed to: Muzhgan Nazarova. [17-1427]
Pg: 1 of 2
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
MUZHGAN I. NAZAROVA,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at
Greensboro. William L. Osteen, Jr., Chief District Judge. (1:16-cv-00910-WO-JEP)
Submitted: August 24, 2017
Decided: August 28, 2017
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and SHEDD and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Muzhgan I. Nazarova, Appellant Pro Se. Kimberly Joyce Lehman, Robert Allen Sar,
OGLETREE DEAKINS NASH SMOAK & STEWART, PC, Raleigh, North Carolina,
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 2
Muzhgan I. Nazarova seeks to appeal the district court’s order directing arbitration
in her civil action, brought pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42
U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17 (2012), against Duke University. 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 appealed order stayed the district
court proceedings pending arbitration of Nazarova’s claims. Consequently, the order is
neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. See 9 U.S.C.
§ 16(b) (2012). We therefore 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.
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?