Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-19-07640/USCOURTS-ca4-19-07640-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 

---

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-7640

JAMES STUART FALLER, II, 

Plaintiff - Appellant, 

v. 

UNITED STATES BUREAU OF PRISONS; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT 

OF JUSTICE; JENNIFER SAAD, as Warden of Gilmer-FCI; JOHN MORAN, 

Individually and in his official capacity; JOSEPH LEE YEAGER, Individually and 

in his official capacity; RANDALL D. LOUK, Individually and in his official 

capacity; GREGG R. FEARDAY, In his official capacity; UNKNOWN FEDERAL 

EMPLOYEES/AGENTS AND DIRECT CONTRACTORS, 

Defendants - Appellees. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at 

Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., Senior District Judge. (5:18-cv-00160-FPS-JPM) 

Submitted: January 21, 2020 Decided: January 24, 2020

Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. 

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

James S. Faller, II, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 

USCA4 Appeal: 19-7640 Doc: 7 Filed: 01/24/2020 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM: 

James Stuart Faller, II, seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion 

to disqualify district and magistrate judges and to appoint a special judge filed in his civil 

action brought pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of 

Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 

28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2018), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 

(2018); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-47

(1949). The order Faller 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

USCA4 Appeal: 19-7640 Doc: 7 Filed: 01/24/2020 Pg: 2 of 2