Case ID: f-appx_530/html/0273-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Chauncey A. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. G.K. WASHINGTON; E. Day, Food Service Manager, N.C.C., Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 13-6156.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: June 20, 2013.
    Decided: June 25, 2013.
    Chauncey A. Williams, Appellant Pro Se. John Michael Parsons, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Before GREGORY, DUNCAN, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
   Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Chauncey Williams seeks to appeal from the district court’s orders: (1) dismissing some claims and some Defendants from his action and directing that the case proceed on Williams’ claim against D. Day regarding lack of wholesome food; and (2) denying reconsideration of that order. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2006), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2006); Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The order Williams 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. 
      
       Although the order denying reconsideration states that it is a final order for purposes of appeal, because the district court did not make an express determination that there was “no just reason for delay” pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 54(b), the order is not an appealable order.