Charles Hunter v. Audra O'Brien

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 3:18-cv-00006-JAG-RCY. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000297484]. Mailed to: Charles Hunter. [18-6314]

Download PDF
Appeal: 18-6314 Doc: 12 Filed: 05/21/2018 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-6314 CHARLES C. HUNTER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. AUDRA O’BRIEN, Commonwealth Prosecutor Office; COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, Prosecutors Office, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Roderick Charles Young, Magistrate Judge. (3:18-cv-00006-JAG-RCY) Submitted: May 17, 2018 Decided: May 21, 2018 Before KING and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Charles C. Hunter, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 18-6314 Doc: 12 Filed: 05/21/2018 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Charles C. Hunter seeks to appeal the magistrate judge’s order directing him to pay, or state under penalty of perjury that he is unable to pay, an initial partial filing fee before proceeding with his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) 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 Hunter 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?