Brian Hill v. EOUSA


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 4:17-cv-00027-JLK-RSB. Copies to all parties and the district court. [1000176613]. Mailed to: Brian Hill. [17-1866]

Download PDF
Appeal: 17-1866 Doc: 12 Filed: 10/19/2017 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-1866 BRIAN DAVID HILL, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS, EOUSA; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, U.S. DOJ, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Danville. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (4:17-cv-00027-JLK-RSB) Submitted: October 17, 2017 Decided: October 19, 2017 Before FLOYD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Brian David Hill, Appellant Pro Se. Cheryl Thornton Sloan, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 17-1866 Doc: 12 Filed: 10/19/2017 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Brian David Hill seeks to appeal the magistrate judge’s order denying his discovery-related motions and granting Defendants’ motion to quash discovery in his pending Freedom of Information Act action. 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 Hill 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 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 2

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?