Case ID: f-appx_51/html/0459-02.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

Anthony DOVE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The CITY OF KINSTON; Kinston Fire Department; Kinston Human Resources/Personnel Department; Gregory Smith, Fire Chief; Karl L. Mun-son, Human Resource Director; County of Lenoir, North Carolina; Lenoir County Sheriff Department; Lenoir County Jail; Billy Smith, Lenoir County Sheriff; Archie Bruiton, Lenoir County Head Jailer; Branson Vickory, District Attorney for District 8; Imelda Pate, District Attorney for District 8A, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 02-6846.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Oct. 9, 2002.
    Decided Dec. 3, 2002.
    Anthony Dove, Appellant Pro Se. Mark Allen Davis, Womble, Carlyle, Sandridge & Ricé, Raleigh, North Carolina; Gerald Patrick Murphy, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appel-lees.
    Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   PER CURIAM.

Anthony Dove appeals the district court’s order dismissing his civil rights complaint as to the Lenoir County Defendants. The remaining aspects of the case are still pending before the district court. This court’s jurisdiction to review cases is limited to those matters involving final decisions of the district court and certain specified interlocutory orders. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291, 1292 (2000). Dove’s appeal does not involve a final order of the district court, nor does it involve an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal-as interlocutory.

Dove has also moved for sanctions against Appellees and questioned the timeliness of Appellees’ responsive brief. We have, reviewed each of these motions and find that they do not merit relief. Accordingly, we deny them both.

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.