Case ID: f-appx_462/html/0292-01.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

Linda K. HUGGINS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. NC DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION, NC Human Relations Commission, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 11-1977.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Jan. 31, 2012.
    Decided: Feb. 2, 2012.
    Linda K. Huggins, Appellant Pro Se. Maiy Ann Stone, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appel-lee.
    Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
   Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Linda K. Huggins seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing only one claim in her employment discrimination action. 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 Huggins seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

Also pending before this court is Huggins’ petition for a writ of mandamus seeking an order directing the district court to enter a final order in the underlying action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b). We conclude that Huggins is not entitled to mandamus relief. See In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir.1988).

We therefore deny the petition for a writ of mandamus and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED.