Case ID: f-appx_622/html/0250-02.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

William Scott DAVIS, II, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF STATE; State of North Carolina; Wake County North Carolina Municipal Government; Town of Cary North Carolina; Social Security Administration, Defendants-Appellees. William Scott Davis, II, Plaintiff-Appellant, and Baby J.F.D., c/o William S. Davis, II; Estate of William Scott Davis, Sr., Deceased, Plaintiffs, v. Albert J. Singer; Danielle Doyle; Sydney J. Batch; Michele Jaworski Suarez; Melanie A. Shekita; Michelle Savage; Eric Craig Chasse; Lisa Sellers; Charlotte Mitchell; Wendy Kirwan; Sonji Carlton; Nancey Berson; Dr. Susan Garvey; Robert B. Radar; Margaret Eagles; Richard Croutharmel; Wake County Government; Batch, Poore & Williams, Defendants-Appellees.
    Nos. 15-1595, 15-1602.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Nov. 17, 2015.
    Decided: Nov. 19, 2015.
    William Scott Davis, II, Appellant Pro Se. George Maralan Kelley, III, Assistant • United States Attorney, Norfolk, VA; Roger Allen Askew, Wake County Attorney’s Office, Raleigh, NC, James Nicholas Ellis, Caroline P. Mackie, Lisa Patterson Sumner, Poyner Spruill LLP, Raleigh, NC; Elizabeth A. Martineau, Martineau King PLLC, Charlotte, NC, Peter Andrew Teumer, Robey Teumer & Drash, Norfolk, VA; Sydney J. Batch, Batch, Poore & Williams LLP, Raleigh, NC; Joseph Ted-ford McFadden, Jr., Rawls, McNelis & Mitchell, Norfolk, VA, for Appellees.
    Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
   Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

In these consolidated appeals, William Scott Davis, II, seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motions to strike, motions for stay, and motions for extension of time in a pending civil matter, and its order returning several of his filed documents in a closed civil matter. 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, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The order denying Davis’ motions is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly,- we deny Davis’ motion for sanctions and dismiss Case No. 15-1595 for lack of jurisdiction.

Turning to Davis’ appeal of the district court’s order returning his documents, we have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm Case No. 15-1602 for the reasons stated by the district court. Davis v. Singer, No. 4:13-cv-00007-RBS-DEM (E.D.Va. May 7, 2015; June 2, 2015). Davis’ motion for sanctions in connection with this appeal is also denied. 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.

No. 15-1595 DISMISSED; No. 15-1602 AFFIRMED.