Case ID: f-appx_670/html/0143-02.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

Robert ENKEMA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. FTI CONSULTING, INC.; FTI LLC, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 16-1842
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: October 7, 2016
    Decided: November 4, 2016
    
      Jonathan Biran, Biran Kelly LLC, Baltimore, Maryland; William David Bridgers, Andrew Archer Warth, Waller, Lansden, Dortch & Davis, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellant. Paul Andrew Fenn, Conti, Fenn & Lawrence, LLC, Baltimore, Maryland; Judith A. Lockhart, Carter, Ledyard & Mulburn, New York, New York, for Appel-lees.
    Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
   Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Robert Enkema seeks to appeal the district court’s order directing arbitration in his civil action against his former employer, FTI Consulting, Inc. (“FTI”). 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). Upon review of the district court’s order, we conclude that the order in question stayed the district court proceedings pending arbitration of Enke-ma’s claims. Consequently, the order is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. See 9 U.S.C. § 16(b)(1), (2) (2012). Therefore, we grant FTI’s motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction and deny as moot Enkema’s motion to reconsider the suspension of the briefing schedule. 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